In a phrase, this projector has something for nearly everyone except for those who are unyielding 1080p/16:9 purists. It is one heck of a unit that will please the vast majority of forward HT enthusiasts who are not 1080/16:9 brainwashed.

Now on to the preview...

I received my dealer demo SX60 Saturday. It may have been one of the first shipped here in the USA other than ones sent out to trade shows and factory salesman.

Opening the box you find a few cables and a nice carrying case. This is pretty much the same packaging as the SX50 but that is where the similarities end. Inside the foam padded carrying case lies the SX60. It is well packaged to take rough handling.

After taking it out of the case the first task I had was to make a new adapter plate for my ceiling bracket. It is not the same hole placement pattern of the SX50. I use a Sony ceiling bracket with a tripod type flange. This lets me machine an adapter plate for most projectors of reasonable weight. A few hours later it is up on the ceiling. Before I did that I decided to test table mount it to see how noisy it was and to give me an idea of how far back it needed to be. The SX50's fans were noisy enough even in low lamp mode that I placed it about twenty feet back from the screen which is about five feet behind my main viewing sofa. That worked to subdue the SX50’s fan noise. However I had mounted my backup DLP projector in that location after selling my SX50 and waiting for the new unit. I have a second open mounting spot directly above the sofa. There was no way I could have placed the SX50 there - not because of the zoom angle but because of the fan noise.

That is all different now. The SX60 has two large slow turning fans. I placed the unit at the front location (about fifteen feet back from my 132" Studiotek 130 screen) and had viewing angle/zoom to spare in or out. But what about the noise level? I have to strain to hear the SX60 even though it is directly overhead. I think it is even more quiet than my Sony LCD CX75 which professes to use the same fan technology in the Qualia. The Sony has two smaller dual fans and is very quiet too. The SX60's fans are far larger. I can not hear much of a db gain even when switching on the normal versus quiet lamp mode.

HDMI/HDCP compatibility? - YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
First test was the Toshiba (Walmart/black) HDD DVD player. No problemo!!! Am setting up an external HDMI switch to test other devices and will try Direct TV's HDMI port later. If it handled the HDD unit, I doubt if others will be a problem. I do not have a Denon DVD anything since I am also an Oppo owner. Have not used that but it should handle Oppo's straight DVI without a hitch.

AUTO SETUP? YEP!!! and it is pretty darn incredible. With the push of one button it auto focuses, auto keystones, auto signal types and (if switched on in the preferences) performs an AUTO SCREEN COLOR ADJUSTMENT. What is that? This is similar to a white balance correction in a digital camera. (Hmm, Canon, camera technology in a projector...cool!). I tested it on my Studiotek screen and it consistently came up with a minor shift in red and green values. But the cool thing about this feature is that it lets the unit shoot onto any color wall - including dark green as in green board "black" boards. In fact green is a fixed setting by itself but this an obviously a very powerful feature - especially for educational and business users but even us outdoor HT fans will find it useful for beaming onto you or your neighbor's house or fence for those backyard or front yard events. This is a big super plus score for Canon and a hint of what Canon can bring to the projector table.

IMAGE Quality?? LCOS!! LCOS!! LCOS!!....
Again literally no screen door effect a few inches back from screen. Pixel alignment? Seems far closer than the SX50 at edges of image even. Black tinted to purple? Cannot say. The SX50's alleged purple black never bothered me. Purple border - did not see one. Have not thoroughly looked for that. Light spill? I need for someone to tell me what to look for. I don’t know precisely what bothered some folks who had it on the SX50. It never bothered me. Perhaps it is how I have the projector mounted?

IMAGE TYPES and CR RATIO!! Here is another area where the SX50 shines compared to the SX50. It has the sRGB which is where we SX50 users made our home which, with a minor tick in blue, it was near dead on 6500. But there was that 1000:1 CR issue. Well this unit has two "movie" viewing modes. One is called “Movie” mode designed to enjoy the atmosphere of a movie theater experience in a "dim" room. It is close to the sRGB setting and has ample brightness to deal with some ambient light in the room.

Here comes this groups crowd pleaser - the Home Cinema mode. This to is where Canon again has done it different. It is not an Auto Iris. An internal filter is dropped into the light path (you can hear it "click") and the image is dimmed down considerably. The CR is reputed to be 2000:1 on live images. In other words this is not on/off CR. Now at first I was not sure if I liked it being of the big and bright fan club but then I watched some movies with dark scenes. Well the blacks are way blacker than in the other modes and yes, the overall picture is lower in lumens too. It does require a dark room to be effective. In this mode the lamp by default drops into the quiet mode and the lamp life is alleged to be 4000 hours. If you want to cheat the system you can put the lamp in normal mode to get more lumens for a larger, brighter image but of course you will shorten the lamp life which is rated at 2500 hours or longer. Bulb costs are about $500.

I have not had a chance to do a DVD based calibration. But the image in Movie or sRGB mode is as startling as the one from the SX50. It is great for sports and watching network TV in SD or HD mode. The SX60 is 4:3 but it 16:9 720P "subset” image is spectacular and will now please those that have to view movies in near absolute dark and who have to have the blacker blacks. The SX60 gives that. How does it stack up to a DLP or SXRD? I can say subjectively that the non-image area of the screen is as "black" as my DLP 2000:1 rated unit. In other words, the blacks are pretty darn black. :)

I should mention that unlike the SX50, it has remote focus and zoom which does make it easier to stand at the screen for that perfect adjustment however the Auto Setup mode had the focus nearly dead on perfect. When manually adjusting focus it throws a cool grid pattern in standard and reverse black and white making it very easy to get it perfect.

With this units SDE effect free image of lush rich deep LCOS/SXRD/DILA class color, with its ability to adjust its color balance to any "screen" material, with its ability to give a big bright image for the some lights on crowd and then do the dark, higher CR image types for the absolute dark cave dwellers among us, Canon has indeed in its second effort given the projector community something to please nearly everyone from HT enthusiast, to educator and on to the business community. At its $4999 MAP price it has a versatility not found in any other projector at any price with a picture quality that can match units costing twice its price and well more. But it isn’t 1080p? So what. All broadcast TV now is 720P. Frequently debated here has been the issue of can you tell the difference between the two on the screen? I've seen the Ruby and it might be a tad sharper but if you can sit on top of the SX60's image from inches away and still it looks like film with no screen door, then the advantage of 1080p putting more info on the screen with smaller pixels is not really noticeable and even less so if the extra info is upscaled from 480 or 720 sources. It will be a long time before 1080p is the prime source even from Blue Ray. How long will it take for a serious number of titles to be out there in 1080p Blue Ray. So why should you pay the extravagant price of a 1080P projector now when there will only be a minimal difference if any to see on the screen?

The SX60 may have flaws that I have yet to find. But for its price, just likes it SX50 predecessor, it is a whole lot of projector for not too many bucks and it has addressed all of the SX50's issues. It is quiet, has HDMI/HDCP, dust blob free and with it various modes it has upped the CR of LCOS without a fussy auto iris to mess with and tweak all day long. It has a long life, "cheap" (by comparison to SXRD and DILA) bulb and has lumens to spare for the lights on party or sporting event showing.

The SX60 has a number of unique color correction controls. They surpass even those on the SX50 by far.

Send your questions and I will attempt to answer them if I have the time or expertise. I do not have any measuring equipment or a PC either since I am a Mac guy.

Icon Master

Icon: I have to admit your arguements have been rather persuasive and considering the problem with the Sony and comments concerning the Cinetron, I ordered an Sx60 yesterday although, it may be two weeks before I receive it. I got it for a rather good price. I am wondering, do these projectors have some sort of built in processor? If not, what would happen if you inputed a 1080i signal and you have the projector in the widescreen mode? I ask this because apparently according to online review at Ultimate AV, the Toshiba A1 downconverts 1080i to 480 and then linedoubles up to 720p if you set this as your output. I do want to correct you on one mattter, 720p is not the set broadcast standard. Only Fox and ABC are using it . Broadcasters in your local may be doing something else.

"The CR is reputed to be 2000:1 on live images. In other words this is not on/off CR."

Thanks for the review, but what on earth do you mean by that contrast ratio comment?

Icon Master,

Thank you for the first review of this long awaited projector! I want a big, bright pixel free image....but I also want to do a 2.35:1 CIH setup. Is it possible to to do this type of setup with the 4:3 SX60 and an outboard scaler?

thanks

Gup

What frame rates does it support? In particular, can it show any film-based frame rates, such as 48Hz? In other words, if you connect a 48Hz signal, will it be displayed at 48Hz, without any tearing or other temporal artifacts?

and does it still tear at native like the SX50?

What frame rates does it support? In particular, can it show any film-based frame rates, such as 48Hz? In other words, if you connect a 48Hz signal, will it be displayed at 48Hz, without any tearing or other temporal artifacts?

Judging by the manual the SX60 frame rates range from 50 Hz to 100 Hz, so I doubt that 48 Hz will work. But 72 Hz might do, so if you have a HTPC or an appropriate scaler at hand...

Judging by the manual
Is the manual available online?

Sorry, I meant spec sheet, manual is not yet online, one should not do two things simultanously---but the SX6* family command codes are online:

http://downloads.canon.com/cpr/software/video/REALiS_command_06.pdf

Obviously Canon put a little more effort into this projector family than into the SX50...

BTW according to Canon Germany the SX60 has 1500:1 on/off CR with activated colorfilter, not 2000:1...

Ah forget the above link, you have to go to the Canon SX60 product page, where you will find the codes...

Nice review Icon.

The choice of very bright or good CR sounds just about perfect.

If anyone wants to send me one (or make me an upgrade offer I can't refuse :) ) I'll measure it.

Ken

"The CR is reputed to be 2000:1 on live images. In other words this is not on/off CR."

Thanks for the review, but what on earth do you mean by that contrast ratio comment?

I asked the same question more or less in the HS50 thread, but didn't get an answer. In fact it has to be on/off since no display panel can achieve that number for ANSI contrast which is the contrast between white and black when present in the same frame at the same time. DLPs can achieve over 600:1 but LCoS is closer to 200 to 300:1 IIRC. A typical good room will allow about 200:1 btw. I've no idea what 2000:1 on live images means and I don't think anyone outside of Canons marketing does either.

It's a step in the right direction and the price is good, but we don't know how well it scales SD or HD yet and that is quite important too, especially as the panel isn't a native resolution for any sources we have right now.

It seems the issues the SX50 had have been fixed, so that's a good thing, and I like the flexibilty it has with the brightness now - too bright will often increase image noise visibilty so being able to dim it down to match your screen (and get better blacks and contrast) will be useful. Being able to go brighter for even bigger screens will be useful too, so that is a plus point IMHO (albeit at the detriment of overall contrast). I'll be interested in the calibrated numbers and it's ability to be set to D65. The SX50 was limited to just adjustments in the gains IIRC.

Gary

Yeah I kinda figured that Gary, I thought an answer could prove amusing though ;)

According to the command codes *.pdf above RGB gain and offsett controls are now available... Let's wait and see.

Yeah I kinda figured that Gary, I thought an answer could prove amusing though ;)

I'm sure it will. :)

Gary

Is it using the same scaler, or is it a better one?

PS Icon, you are still a little confused about CR.

It will be a long time before 1080p is the prime source even from Blue Ray.Others have covered the CR issue and your confusion there, so I'll leave that one. But you seem to be just as confused here. The vast majority of HD DVDs are 1080p and Blu Ray will be the same way. Although some get confused and think that 1080p film transported with a 1080i signal isn't 1080p material.

Sounds like a nice projector.

--Darin

Icon,

Thanks for your review....we look forward to more info as you get time to play with this new unit.

Quick questions regarding install.....since you ceiling mounted your unit, did you install it inverted?

Did you have to drop the top of the lens about 7" below the top of your screen in order to get the projector at a 90 degree right angel to the screen so that you can avoid any keystone correction? I want to make sure I read the Canon brochure correctly.


Anyone interested in putting together a possible powerbuy?


Jason

Icon, you keep referring to the projector as having "HDMI/HDCP". Doesn't this model have a DVI input though, not HDMI? HDMI is the connector; HDCP is for digital content protection and is exclusive of the transport method.

The only thing I'd like confirmed is the ability for the SX60 to accept 1080p via DVI. The Canon web site only lists 1080i, and with BluRay and future HD-DVD players outputting 1080p directly, I'd like to avoid the whole 1080i deinterlacing/scaling mess. Somehow, I doubt the Canon is doing it properly.


Anyone interested in putting together a possible powerbuy?

Get somebody to arrange a SX60/Panamorph powerbuy, and I'd probably jump at it. Throw in an external scaler with proper 1080i deinterlacing and a selectable 1400x1050 resolution, and I don't think I could say no.

As much as I've enjoyed the various 1-chip DLPs I've owned over the last few years--some of them quite pricey--I still look back at my SX21/Panamorph/HD Leeza days with the most fondness. No rainbows, no screen door, no dithering...no contrast ;)

I'd like the give the SX60 a try though. Perhaps the combination of acceptable contrast with the perception of better blacks in HD material* will be satisfying enough to forget the inky blacks of DLP.

Then again, with all that stuff piled together, the price would probably be pretty close to Ruby street prices...


* Anyone else notice this? For some reason, HD material appears to have better blacks than SD material. I know this isn't technically possible because digital black is digital black, but maybe the extra shadow detail and color detail/gradations are improving perceived contrast/black level?

I know what you mean about the blacks thirdkind - I noticed something similar with 3chip DLP too. I wonder if the better compression algorithm with HD (less mpg artefacts?) and less dithering with 3chip means a more solid black and the illusion of being blacker? Screendoor also seems less with HD - at least that was the impression we got on the Sony HS61 and I'm not sure why either.

Gary

Other than lumens, any big difference between this and the SX6?

Originally posted by Icon Master
It is one heck of a unit that will please the vast majority of forward HT enthusiasts who are not 1080/16:9 brainwashed.

This seems like an odd statement, with blu-ray and HD-DVD supporting 1080i/p. Canon better have a damn good internal scaler...

Other than lumens, any big difference between this and the SX6?

Price. Lack of the magical contrast filter. I suspect that the filter
is nothing more than a ND filter. The real question is what is the
difference in firmware between the SX6 and SX60.

Anyone care to speculate?

Can someone send me an email on stocking dealers.

tom

Projector reviews.com has announced that they will be conducting a review before the end of this month, of the sx60, at the request of Canon as a home theater projector! I don't know of any manufacturer making such a request unless they believe they're going to get raves for their product.

I'll try to answer the SX60 questions brought up so far however some I cannot answer since I do not have the information or abilty to measure or provide various input frequencies to see the results.

For one the unit will not handle 1080p input - only 1080i. I cannot answer the question of how it down and up converts. What I have seen however is that from my HiDef Direct TV receiver the output looks a tad sharper in 1080i than 720p. In fact the HDNET test pattern has a line that says if you can read this you have a 1080 capable display and I can read it in 1080i mode and that tiny bottom resolution testing line is fuzzy in 720p mode. I'll let the experts here figure out what that means. Does this mean it has a "darn good internal scaler?"

I know I seem confused over CR and perhaps I am because I do not know how to categorize what Canon said in the sales training material I received and this info is not on the Canon web site. I did see where the German site say 1500:1 but the American literature and even the manual say 2000:1 in Cinema mode. In the dealer sales brochure it also clearly states "that unlike the methods used by other manufacturers to measure CR we do it by measuring it simultaneously on screen at the same time." You guys will tell me what this means. Does any other manufacturer measure CR in this way and what would you call it?

I can say with certainty that the area outside the lit up wide screen image yet in the 4:3 projected field is as dark as that of my 2000:1 DLP. Again I'm talking about Cinema mode only.

I'm not up on the 2.35:1 approach. The SX60 has an auto mode that does well to fit the image with no edge clipping loss across the width of the image. Depending on what is being fed in HiDef mode I have seen the height of the image vary considerably. I'm not sure I get why you would want to squeeze an image down and distort it so it fits a certain ratio. I guess I am confuse on this too. But on the other had since this is a 4:3 unit and it is capable of dealing with images from 4:3 on down to 2.35:1 and all those in between why in the heck do you want to mess around and either loose image or distort it? At the movie theaters of today different flicks have the different height to width ratios and the better theaters mask the edges to fit. You'll see the curtain move as they switch from the previews to the feature film. In general I don't recall seeing a distorted image - just custom masking to suit each particular flick. Thus having a 4:3 unit is an advantage over 16:9 since you will see all there is to see without distortion.

On the tearing issue, I never saw it on the SX50. I think that only happened using a PC to feed the unit at certain frequencies and in my case I am using with component or DVI and now HDCP to link to the SX60. I do have to make a correction. THe unit has a DVI type port that handles HDCP via a HDMI to DVI adapter cable. You guys are darn sharp and I was loose in my terminology there.

Along those lines I just tested the Oppo's DVI output ant is looked great and I also fed it HDMI/HDCP->DVI from my Dish Net receiver and it handled that output as well. My Direct TV's HDMI port may be broken since it did not work with either projecotr or perhaps I have missed a setup setting there but it will not sync up with either of my projectors unless it is a too long of a cable issue. The other units I have have all worked fine using their HDMI or DVI outputs to both of my projectors. If anyone knows if cable length is an issue with the Direct TV HiDef Tivo unit let me know. For now it word fine via component.

There are several approaches to adjusting color values not. Beside the six point old way which had RGB and the CMY, there is another screen and there is also the RGB screen to which is where the auto setup tweaks color balance values for your particular screen (or wall or chalkboard).

When I ceiling mounted the unit I did invert it. The screw holes for the factory available ceiling mount kit are on the bottom of the projector. Canon's ceiling kit sells for about $900. I used my $175 Sony ceiling kit and made an adapter "plate" with about $10 worht of material and about three hours of my time. I saved enough money there to buy myself a spare bulb. :)

The big difference between the SX60 and the SX6 besides 2500 lumens to 3500 lumens is the Cinema mode. It drops an internal filter into the light path to get the reported 2000:1 CR. The other LCOS Canon units do not have this. Cannot say if there is s firmware difference .

Ken - you need to come to New Orleans with your measuring tools. Even with our widespread devistation the food and music here s still great here. I live out in the quiet 'burbs in an area that was not badly damaged by Katrina. Everyone on this web site including the folks outside the USA should come visit New Orleans, not to see the SX60, but to see what a powerful hurricane can do. The damage is so widespread it is almost unconceivable. I have only seen a fraction of it myself and it still has me shaking my head when I drive through vast areas of New Orleans that remain uninhabitable. Hopefully in your lifetimes this never happens again here or anywhere but t is something that has to be seen first hand to comprehend.

Icon Master

IconMaster --- How 'bout the image? If you had a SX50 and didn't need HDCP and didn't mind the loudness -would you still get the SX60?

In the non-cinema mode do you see any difference?

When the filter is dropped do you see any color change or just brightness?

Thanks

Icon, great review! Now find me a great trade up deal!! :D

Question--is the blue halo problem gone? I made a masking frame that is positioned in front of the projector that deals with it nicely but I wouldn't mind not having to use that.

Second Question--does it use a different lamp than the SX50?

Again, thanks for an excellent review.

Question--is the blue halo problem gone? I made a masking frame that is positioned in front of the projector that deals with it nicely but I wouldn't mind not having to use that.

Second Question--does it use a different lamp than the SX50?


Dan - I don't recall seeing a blue Halo but thinking back I don't know if the later model SX50 w/o dust blobs had it as well. Tell me what I should do to make it show up and I will run a test for you. Also what was the issue with light leakage and under what conditions did it show up?

This unit has an entirely different lamp than the SX50. It is actually a lower wattage bulb but appears to be just a "bright" in the sRGB, Movie, Standard and Presentation mode. Perhaps that is why it is called an advanced AISYS design since it is more efficient.

If you have an SX50 and don't need HDCP (unfortunately the handwriting is on the wall that at some point in time you will need it or a fake-out black box), and you don't feel the need for the Cinema 2000:1 CR mode, and the fan noise level of the SX50 is not bothering you nor does yours have any dust blobs then stay with the SX50.

I'm on the fence about the CR mode myself but here's a "blind" test I ran. I had the unit in Cinema mode and started playing "Munich" DVD for my wife. (Remember my wife is a gifted professional graphic artist who has a great eye for color, etc and who was NOT impressed by the Ruby in a showroom demo of suspect calibration). Anyway, the room was totally dark although not hermetically sealed. :) Tinkering with the settings, I flipped the unit into Movie mode (Darin will love this) and my wife's reaction was "Put it back, its too bright." Indeed the blacks in the image were more gray and the light areas were more faded too. Granted that I have not calibrated the unit using one of the DVD's. I'll try to do that this weekend and see if I can pull another sneak attack test on the wife afterwards. :)

The really cool thing about the SX60 is that it does give you the choice of how you want to use the unit. With the standard below 1000 lumen (and usually way more expensive) projectors, it always has to be lights out. With the SX60 we now have a unit that gives you a great picture both ways - with some lights on or all totally off. And let us not diminish the potential value of the Auto Screen color balance feature - especially for those who give those outdoor parties or who take the RV out for road trips. You don't have to have a white house or RV anymore to use either as your outdoor screen, however it will have to be all one color. :)

Icon Master

In the dealer sales brochure it also clearly states "that unlike the methods used by other manufacturers to measure CR we do it by measuring it simultaneously on screen at the same time." You guys will tell me what this means. Does any other manufacturer measure CR in this way and what would you call it? I would like to see them show us what test pattern they use. There are 2 main kinds of CR in specs, ANSI CR and on/off CR. ANSI CR is done simultaneously and is a 4x4 checkerboard, but there is very little chance that they get anywhere near their 1500:1 or 2000:1 claims with that test. Measuring ANSI CR, claiming that they measure simultaneously and then publishing on/off CR (which can't be done simultaneously) would be misleading, so I would like to see their pattern for their claim, as I said.

--Darin

This would need to be an almost completely black screen with a small white square in one of the outer corners or something similar, and even then I would doubt that you get anywhere near 2000:1 or 1500:1 with a three chip LCOS projector...

Hey Icon,

Did you actually try 1080P input? The SX50 doesn't list it either, but it works great and no tearing. It would be a bummer if the SAX60 didn't support it.

The only standard resolution that tears on the SX50 is 480P. 720P and 1080i do not.

The SX50 handles 1080i extremely well as you've verified with the HDNet test pattern. It makes the tearing at native (1400x1050/60Hz) pretty much a non-issue.

I'm confused on your Cinema Mode anecdote with your wife. She thought it looked brighter *with* the filter or *without*? And when you say the blacks looked grayer, I assume you mean they were more neutral. So can you describe the blacks and whites witha and without the filter one more time? Are the blacks blacker? Does the image look "better"? (You may need to apply the filter and use it for awhile to avoid being biased by the brighter mode - maybe watch a familiar movie?)

Not likely I'll get the time to come over any time soon, but If I do I'll give you a call. I'm a tourist and love a good bowl of Red Bean-n-Rice, but it's too hit and miss. Maybe you know a place you can trust?

I haven't noticed my newer SX50's Halo now that you mention it. I'll have to fire it up and look for it. My blackest black does tend to blue. (flat D65 from 10-100IRE though)

Thanks,
Ken

Hey Icon,
Did you actually try 1080P input? The SX50 doesn't list it either, but it works great and no tearing. It would be a bummer if the SAX60 didn't support it.

I'm confused on your Cinema Mode anecdote with your wife. She thought it looked brighter *with* the filter or *without*? And when you say the blacks looked grayer, I assume you mean they were more neutral. So can you describe the blacks and whites witha and without the filter one more time? Are the blacks blacker? Does the image look "better"? (You may need to apply the filter and use it for awhile to avoid being biased by the brighter mode - maybe watch a familiar movie?)

I haven't noticed my newer SX50's Halo now that you mention it. I'll have to fire it up and look for it. My blackest black does tend to blue. (flat D65 from 10-100IRE though)


Its Red beans and rice - not red bean and rice. :)

My wife found the image with the filter off (Movie or RGB mode) to be too bright and the light areas are more washed and the blacks more gray. There is no color shift between Movie and Cinema mode but I see a tad bit of difference in a color pattern in sRGB mode.

This whole issue relates to an ongoing exchange that I have with Darin and other folks here. I love the big bright images of higher lumen projectors - especially of course the SX50 and now the SX60. In the past when I tested 1000 lumen and below units I used the expression that my eyes were "thirsty" for more light. The way to compensate is to reduce the image size or try highly reflective screen materials - neither of these are viable alternatives for me. If I have to shrink the screen size down then don't bother with a forward projector. Get one of the new JVC 70" RPTV's. Nor do I want to keep switching screen materials. The StudioTek 130 I have seems to be a very good product.

I do find my eyes a bit thirsting for more lumens in Cinema mode but there is more detail in the image and as Darin will be quick to point out, after a while in total darkness (ouch) your eyes do adjust. I still maintain the physiology that eyes are less color sensitive in dimmer light, but your eyes and brain do adjust to some extent. That is why the majority of folks here are happy with their 1000 lumen or less projectors. They are used to dim and accept it or they play the screen size and/or material game.

Till now no one has ever seen a projector that can make a change from high lumen decent CR to one with low lumen rather good CR at the flick of a "switch." I think both camps of users here (high or low lumen) will be startled by the differences between the two modes. I have been so used to the big, bright images with a bit of light on in the room, I never gave the other approach a serious run for the money. Now I can. I want to see which I end using after doing the calibration bit. I did do a brief test again with the Cinema mode and forced the lamp to normal versus quiet mode. It did kick up the image lumens a tad but I don't think it was startling enough of a change to sacrifice one-third of the lamp life but I plan to test that more too.

I do not have a 1080p source so I cannot confirm if it works with the SX60 but if it did work with the SX50, then it is likely it will with the SX60. The specs on either do not mention 1080p support. Send me a Blue-Ray player, or better yet recorder, and I will give it a 1080p workout. :)

One other thing I mentioned a long, long time ago but cannot confirm on the SX60 since I have not opened it, is that nearly every major chip in the SX50 had the JVC logo etched on it. This leads me to believe these are essentially JVC projectors stem to stern but with Canon's lenses and AISYS design for the panel assembly and optical path.

I still do not see the "blue" black you mention and never did. I think by you saying it that way you are doing the Canon LCOS product a disservice. The black are black but, while I do not see it, I will accept the finding that others here do see a minute bit of blue or purple in the SX50's black. My eyes simply do not see that and I have tried. Ken - is your purple border now gone along with the dust blobs?

Icon Master

Till now no one has ever seen a projector that can make a change from high lumen decent CR to one with low lumen rather good CR at the flick of a "switch."Depends on what people call "high lumen", but I had a Sharp 11k that could go from about 600 calibrated lumens and 1300:1 on/off CR to about 230 lumens and 4k:1 on/off CR with a button on the remote about 2 and a half years ago. And I've shown people the results of ft-lamberts changes themselves with no changes to a projector like that just by changing screen material. This allowed them to see some of the advantages and disadvantages (like more visible artifacts with many of our sources to people who notice them) of higher ft-lamberts.

--Darin

Icon: Thanks for the information. it was useful. If you make contact again with your Canon rep. could you please make inquiry as to what type of screen they recommend for this projector in cinema mode. I am a cave dweller. I want to achieve blacks colder than my dead heart.

The SX50 handles 1080i extremely well as you've verified with the HDNet test pattern. It makes the tearing at native (1400x1050/50Hz) pretty much a non-issue.

So the SX50 only accepts 1400x1050 at 50Hz? Weird. No 60Hz? And it tears?

If you send the SX50 a 720p/1080i/1080p signal, does it automatically lock into 16:9 mode, or can the image be stretched out by the projector for use with an anamorphic lens?

I can accept a lack of native res support if I can send the SX60 1080p via DVI and let the projector downscale. That way, I can use a scaler or HTPC for DVDs and send 1080p straight from a BluRay player (which could also handle DVD upscaling if the quality is good enough). However, if the SX60 locks into 16:9 mode with 720p/1080i/1080p, that means no anamorphic lens, which sucks.

However, if the SX60 locks into 16:9 mode with 720p/1080i/1080p, that means no anamorphic lens, which sucks.

Unless you want to use it for a 2.35:1 scope screen in which case it might work just fine. Admitted you'll be losing some res in doing so, but it's probably how I would use it.

Gary

Unless you want to use it for a 2.35:1 scope screen in which case it might work just fine. Admitted you'll be losing some res in doing so, but it's probably how I would use it.

That's what I'm debating at the moment. I'm either going with a constant height setup (16:9 projector with anamorphic lens) or a fixed width setup (16:9 projector or SX60 with anamorphic lens). Either one is fine with me, so it comes down to whatever projector I choose.

What I don't want is light spill. If the SX60 locks into 16:9 mode with HD signals, it's a no-go because of the light spill. I could always use 1400x1050 from an external scaler with an anamorphic lens, but all that equipment is as much as a Ruby.

So the SX50 only accepts 1400x1050 at 50Hz? Weird. No 60Hz? And it tears?

If you send the SX50 a 720p/1080i/1080p signal, does it automatically lock into 16:9 mode, or can the image be stretched out by the projector for use with an anamorphic lens?

I can accept a lack of native res support if I can send the SX60 1080p via DVI and let the projector downscale. That way, I can use a scaler or HTPC for DVDs and send 1080p straight from a BluRay player (which could also handle DVD upscaling if the quality is good enough). However, if the SX60 locks into 16:9 mode with 720p/1080i/1080p, that means no anamorphic lens, which sucks.


1400x1050 at 60Hz tears. It does not tear at 50Hz at any rez.

I pretty much only use two resolutions now. 1080i and 1080p. 1080p uses the entire 1400x1050 panel and I squeeze it with an anamorphic lens if needed. 1080i I let the projector handle it. It's very good with 1080i material.

Ken

Raneil, I can tell you that the Firehawk works VERY good with this projector.

1400x1050 at 60Hz tears. It does not tear at 50Hz at any rez.

I pretty much only use two resolutions now. 1080i and 1080p. 1080p uses the entire 1400x1050 panel and I squeeze it with an anamorphic lens if needed. 1080i I let the projector handle it. It's very good with 1080i material.

Got it now, thanks. Hopefully someone can check the SX60 at 1400x1050/60Hz and see if Canon managed to fix the tearing.

As long as it accepts 1080p via DVI without issues and it fills the entire image area, I'd probably forgive tearing at its native resolution. I've conducted a lot of tests with projectors at both native resolution and higher resolutions, and while I saw slight differences on test patterns, letting the projector downscale a resolution higher than its native resolution never produced any visible differences during actual program material.

An SX60 with an anamorphic lens and Samsung BluRay player would be a very tempting purchase for me next month.

DanHouck, it is nice to see you posting again. You, Kenland and Icon have been the real carriers of this post and I appreciate all the information the three of you have been providing since the sx50 was released. Dan I have been thinking a lot about the screen and sound projection from the center speaker. I started to think about getting a screen that I can place a speaker behind (best sound is acheived when speakers are at equal height. I live in an apartment and my ceiling is about 8ft. in height and my front speakers are 3 and 3 quarter ft. high. All the screens I've seen are expensive and I don't want to waste money. I'm thinkinng of doing a D.I.Y. until I can come to some sort of conclusion as to speaker, projector and screen setup. I have 7 speakers in front of my system and nine from center to back. I am trying not to drive myself nuts over the complexity of the system as a whole. I also want to get an anamorphic lens to take full advantage of the projectors resolution and I was looking at the posts concerning Luiwzens lens and was wondering if it would work with the Canon. I am trying to avoid blowing bucks on this projector since the Cinetron may be ready for prime time about one year from now. I have read that a processor is not necessary to use a anamorpic lens and this particular lens was supposed to be around "3" in price. I would appreciate your thoughts on this .

"All the screens I've seen are expensive and I don't want to waste money"

Check out Dazian Celtic Coated Cloth, $35 + shipping for a 10' wide piece of material.

Check out Dazian Celtic Coated Cloth, $35 + shipping for a 10' wide piece of material.
Dazian is OK, but its weave is a little too loose if I remember correctly. Tryg knows a material which he claims is among the best, and it is very reasonably priced. Drop him a PM (he if very good about replying and has a lot of experience with different screen materials).

Raneil, you'll need a perfed screen material, I have to defer to those who know a lot more than I do to answer this one. I am using a Stewart Firehawk with mine and my center speaker is right below it and aimed so that its center of focus is ear level in the seating area (a row of HT recliners). The Firehawk was designed for digital projectors, particularly LCD, and its CR enhancement and mild gain is perfect IMO. My projector runs on low lamp at all times and is plenty bright.

Pesonally speaking, I find the superior fill of the LCOS chips and the high resolution make a lens unnecessary. I'm in the process of adding a screen masking to my 4:3 screen which I think will be all that is necessary as it will make the "black" bars truly black, which a lens will also do when compressing a 4:3 image to 16:9.

I had a Panamorph liquid filled lens with my previous LCD but found it unnecessary with this one. Decided it added more distortion and tended to soften the already very smooth image too much. Remember that some lenses shorten throw (Isco) and some do not (Panamorph) so make sure you understand this issue when selecting a lens.

It is a simple matter to make a manual masking system with a low screen like you have and frankly I would suspect the SX60 with its cinema black mode will have pretty dark black bars anyway. So I recommend you keep it simple to begin with, use home-made masks, skip the lens and rely on the very decent scaler in the projector, and go from there.

I had a Panamorph liquid filled lens with my previous LCD but found it unnecessary with this one. ... So I recommend you keep it simple to begin with, use home-made masks, skip the lens and rely on the very decent scaler in the projector, and go from there.

I am in total agreement with Dan on this. Use a good 4:3 screen, forget the morphing lens and all the other source issues entailed and enjoy the SX50 or SX60 as is. Keep is simple and keep the cost down. Save your money for your DVD's and other equipment. The slight boost in resolution and brightness will be minimal and as Dan said the lens may even make the image less sharp.

I do not have a masking system. I suppose it would be nice but I have never had a single guest bring up the issue. They have been blown away by the bright, sharp, film-like quality of these Canon units. A masking scheme would be icing on the cake that perhaps only you will notice.

No dust blobs and the SX60 is quiet. I sometimes forget it is on. I also think the panel convergence is better making the image a tad sharper than the SX50 although this may vary from unit to unit. Time will tell as more folks get them. Am I still the only SX60 owner out there?

Icon Master

Hello, I am new to the forum. I have a canon sx-50 and am using the new anthem D2. Will the HDCP on the sx50 prevent me from using the D2 for channelling the video into the D2 and out to the sx-50. I haevn't been able to set the D2 to resolve the oppo DVD nor the Cable Box .
If so would an upgrade to the sx60 resolve this problem. Thirdly is the sx60 available for retail purchase, where?
Thanks

[QUOTE=Icon Master]n fact the HDNET test pattern has a line that says if you can read this you have a 1080 capable display and I can read it in 1080i mode and that tiny bottom resolution testing line is fuzzy in 720p mode. I'll let the experts here figure out what that means. Does this mean it has a "darn good internal scaler?"
Icon Master[/QUOTE

I too have Dish HDNET, could you tell me in what channel you get the HDNET test pattern?

Thanks.

Any ideas on where this projector is in stock?

I am in total agreement with Dan on this. Use a good 4:3 screen, forget the morphing lens and all the other source issues entailed and enjoy the SX50 or SX60 as is. Keep is simple and keep the cost down. Save your money for your DVD's and other equipment. The slight boost in resolution and brightness will be minimal and as Dan said the lens may even make the image less sharp.

In all fairness to the Panamorph people, Dan was using the old liquid-filled lens, which is a completely different beast from the newer all-glass versions. I've tried both and the difference is quite noticeable. There should be no resolution loss with a newer lens if it's set up properly.

I know you like your 4:3 material looming large, but anyone considering a new projector should think about the majority of their viewing material and its aspect ratio. If it's mostly 16:9 and the SX60 is still their projector of choice, an anamorphic lens is worth considering.

I personally would never have a setup that makes TV shows huge and films tiny. That's backwards unless you mostly watch TV with your projector.

Why wouldn't you watch TV with your projector?

Why wouldn't you watch TV with your projector?

Because it looks like crap blown up to that size and my theater is a dedicated room in my finished basement. I have several traditional displays throughout my house that I consider more appropriate for watching the news.

For me, TV is just TV. Movies are an event.

Third kind, I'm going to reiterate: You don't need more brightness with the Canons, ANY lens is going to add some distortion and you don't need more resolution at normal viewing distances because of the high fill factor of the LCOS chips and the high resolution of this projector. IMHO, not worth the major bucks ($1500) that the really good Panamorph costs and I have been told that the cheaper one DOES introduce noticeable distortion.

I am not suggesting there aren't good uses for the Panamorph, I am suggesting in a starting-out situation where money is important, as described above, that this is the last thing I'd do. IMHO he's better off spending the money for a good screen first.

For me, TV is just TV. Movies are an event.

Whatever! I would rather watch an episode of Lost, BSG, Drawn Together, etc. than 99% of the movies out there.

Ericglo

For a bit more than $1500, get a video scaler. It's amazing how good my kids VHS video look with a VP30 driving the output section. I don't have a SX50/SX60, but the VP30 sure works well with my projector (an AE900U).

I understand that the SX60 is in stock and shipping.
The SX6 should be shipping as well.

I'll be ordering my unit this week I think, but I'm torn between the SX6 or Sx60.

Does anyone know if the SX6 has a low power mode?
For those SX50 owners. Does the bulb fade after a few hundred hours?

Because it looks like crap blown up to that size and my theater is a dedicated room in my finished basement. I have several traditional displays throughout my house that I consider more appropriate for watching the news.

For me, TV is just TV. Movies are an event.

So you play upstairs, downstairs all about town? Where do HiDef network shows fall - upstairs or downstairs or does it depend on their Nielson rating? I suppose regardless of where you draw the line this running downstairs for movies and upstairs for TV shows keeps you fit. :)

With a hot source like a big satellite dish, regular SD TV does looks darn good blown up to full 4:3 splendor on the SX50 & SX60 - even without a scaler. And there are those pesky old classic movies like "Gone With the Wind,""Wuthering Heights," "Hunchback of Notre Dame," and just a few others that were filmed in the days of 4:3. Many are now out on DVD. Do you really think those look better on your upstairs TV sets or suspended in a 16:9 letterbox with side columns than they do in full screen splendor on these Canon LCOS units? In two words you find these old movies "incredible" and "startling" when viewed on a huge 4:3 screen because most of us have only seen them on TV sets.

No "kiddo"(as in kidding yourself) you've got it wrong. You have the 16:9 compulsive fever and that narrows down your options. We Canon folks don't have that. We've got the best of both worlds. We have big, bright film-like HiDef and we've got big, bright high quality SD without letter boxes and both without screen door effect or DLP artifacts or rainbows and we don't have to watch them in dark caves either because we have lumens to spare and our Canon bulbs do not go dim after several hundred hours of viewing like many of the projectors out there.

Icon Master

You don't need more brightness with the Canons, ANY lens is going to add some distortion and you don't need more resolution at normal viewing distances because of the high fill factor of the LCOS chips and the high resolution of this projector.

Your comment about brightness is irrelevant because it's not the reason I'd recommend the lens. I want the lens in order to eliminate light spill and increase available resolution. To address your second point, the distortion introduced by a lens is negligible if set up correctly, and I'll just flat-out disagree with you on the resolution comment. Fill factor and resolution are two different things, and I don't care if the fill factor is 100%--more resolution is always preferable. I had an SX21, which is a LCOS projector with 1400x1050 panels, and I still saw pixel structure from my viewing distance (about 1.5x). Not because I could see the space in between pixels, but because I could see jagged edges.

And why would I want to cram a 1080p source into 788 lines of resolution? Seems like a waste of those high-resolution panels to me.


So you play upstairs, downstairs all about town? Where do HiDef network shows fall - upstairs or downstairs or does it depend on their Nielson rating?

I get to watch movies so rarely these days that it's no contest. Nielson ratings don't come into it. If I have to choose between bubblegum pop crap like CSI and any number of good films, whether I've seen them before or not, I'll take the movie, thanks.

The only shows I've ever watched on my projector were some of the HBO series (The Sopranos, Six Feet Under, and Deadwood). The rest play in the background while I surf or work.


With a hot source like a big satellite dish, regular SD TV does looks darn good blown up to full 4:3 splendor on the SX50 & SX60 - even without a scaler.

Subjective opinion. If you find SD blown up to that size enjoyable, I'm happy for you. It gives a good clue as to how picky you are though.


And there are those pesky old classic movies like "Gone With the Wind,""Wuthering Heights," "Hunchback of Notre Dame," and just a few others that were filmed in the days of 4:3. Many are now out on DVD. Do you really think those look better on your upstairs TV sets or suspended in a 16:9 letterbox with side columns than they do in full screen splendor on these Canon LCOS units? In two words you find these old movies "incredible" and "startling" when viewed on a huge 4:3 screen because most of us have only seen them on TV sets.

First, these films aren't 4:3. That's a broadcast standard. They were filmed in Academy ratio, which is 1.37:1.

Second, Academy ratio films aren't meant to be taller than wider aspect ratios such as 1.85:1 and 2.35:1. Constant height, not constant width.

If your preference is to watch Academy ratio films at a size larger than films with wider ratios, that's great. Don't tell everyone else they're wrong though, because they're not. You're the one who has it backwards.


No "kiddo"(as in kidding yourself) you've got it wrong. You have the 16:9 compulsive fever and that narrows down your options. We Canon folks don't have that. We've got the best of both worlds. We have big, bright film-like HiDef and we've got big, bright high quality SD without letter boxes and both without screen door effect or DLP artifacts or rainbows and we don't have to watch them in dark caves either because we have lumens to spare and our Canon bulbs do not go dim after several hundred hours of viewing like many of the projectors out there.

We know. You like your Canon.

Actually, I have constant height 2.35:1 fever. You know, the way those morons in the film industry do it. The SX60 will make a constant height setup problematic, but if it's shown to be a great performer, I might pick one up anyway and try to make it work.

Just as your SX50 posts have proven, you're incapable of a subjective opinion when it comes to these projectors, so I'm looking forward to tests conducted by knowledgeable individuals with technical aptitude and no bias. I hope this thread doesn't turn into another pile of "Icon Master is right and you're wrong" garbage.

Tell me Icon, how many screen widths back do you sit from your SD material such that it looks so good?

Thank you all for your useful comments I truely do appreciate them. Dan, I was reading a review on a screen and the reviewer said that he places black backing material behind the screen. He seemed to indicate that he didn't have to use masking for 4:3 material. Look at Audioholics review of the Carada Criterion screen by Ray Adkins and see what you think. ..... I ask that people refrain from attacking each other. Icon is just stating his opinion on what he knows. We all are here to make contributions. How many of you here know of anybody in your daily life who understands the issues discussed in this forum? How many people do you know that can follow what to you is an intelligent conversation. Personally, I enjoy the discussion and learning from others here. ....... Those of you who seek more information as to where to go to learn more about this product ( and all that meaning entails) go to projector central, you'll be pleased if you do so.

I wonder how Icon will market any 16:9 Canon projectors in the future?

Recently the X50 was the best pj in town so we should all go out and buy one (regardless of the issues it has). Now that the SX60 is here, we should buy that instead and many X50 owners are talking about upgrading to the 60 already. Icon dumped his 50 in no time flat so that is pretty telling IMHO.

Thirdkind is absolutely correct though - 4:3 should be smaller than 16:9 which should be smaller than 2.35:1 - that is how the industry progressed and how some people at home have too (with 2.35:1 CH layout). I also agree that tv programs should be smaller than movies, so movies have a bigger visual impact than tv shows. Family Guy shouldn't be bigger visually than Ben Hur or Saving Private Ryan etc etc. IMHO of course, which is why 4:3 isn't everyone's choice.

Gary.

Tell me Icon, how many screen widths back do you sit from your SD material such that it looks so good?

The implication by this, I suppose snide comment, and some of the other posts here show the utter lack of experience with using a big dish satellite receiver. So and so says he only watches movies on his 2.35:1 setup and that Hollywood only does them that way.

If that were the case then why do good movie theaters have adjustable masking for the flicks they show? If that were the case then why are the widescreen DVD's released with various W:H ratios and often they are not 2.35:1. A sampling of several of my widescreen DVD's also showed 2.20:1, 1.85:1 and 2.40:1. If so and so is such a movie watcher but rarely uses his HT because he doesn't watch movies that often, that says something about him and his under use of a major investment. Well as it turns out you all could be watching a bunch more movies every night and day if you had a big satellite dish. There are far more movie channels being broadcast on the big dish than on either cable, Direct TV and Dish Network. I know because I have them all.

However these additional movie channels are mostly telecast in 4:3 format. Does that keep me from enjoying the flick? No - of course not. Would I like to see them all in HiDef - of course but that will likely not happen in my lifetime if ever. So am I going to run upstairs like our friend here every time a movie or decent show is coming over in SD - Absolutely Not!

And who says that SD should be smaller than 16:9? That is only a rationalization made by folks with 16:9 projectors or TV sets who cannot blow up SD telecasts to their original proportion without distorting the image. EXAMPLE: Till recently the fights on HBO and Showtime were all sent out in SD. I can letterbox the SD fights too but they look far better in full screen 4:3 mode. Yep - the fighters are almost life size then and it feels like they are almost in the room. As to the picture quality - that depends on the source and cameras used but most of those movie channels being sent through on the big dish in SD format look far better than the compressed signal version of the same channels coming down on the small dishes or via cable. In fact the HiDef telecast coming trough on the big dish are also better in quality than their small dish and cable counterparts.

As too the issue of lost of image quality by the projector and those unused, wasted scan lines, the SX50 and SX60 are full 720p capable. If you want to spend extra money to fill the entire 4:3 LCOS panels and squeeze that image down to 16:9 you will gain about a third more vertical resolution (and zero horizontal) if the morph lens were perfect. That is not going to be noticeable. I am not seeing any pixilation as so and so did with his SX21. Maybe its my eyes or maybe its his old projector but the Canon units are sharp and you do not see the pixels unless you are inches from the screen. Sorry "kiddo" - no pixelations in our Canons...

Back to the old movies - their ration is 1.33:1 which is not precisely 4:3-> 1.25:1 but its very close and the old movies ARE WIDER THAN TALLER contrary to what was stated by so and so (His math has become a bit dyslexic after climbing up and down those stairs all day). "Casablanca" is another one of those oldies that is "4:3" and has to be seen big and not crunched into a dim 16:9 pillared letterbox to be truly appreciated.

How will I handle Canon's 16:9 if and when one comes out. Well I do have two projectors ceiling mounted - one is for backup and watching less critical stuff. That is an approach many could take. If I had a Ruby or "Q" I too would not waste their expensive bulbs on CNN telecasts but I wouldn't be running upstairs to watch it on TV either (First I don't have stairs and secondly if I did I am not in that good of shape to keep doing that.). I'd setup a secondary 4:3 projection unit for the other stuff - whatever that may be. Why waste a perfectly good HT room? If you got it use it!

Icon Master

Theaters have adjustable side masking, so 4:3 will be smallest, then the curtains will retract for a 16:9 movie, and retract further for a 2.35:1 movie.

A DVD informs you of the aspect of the movie, and in some cases it will be cropped for 4:3. Those who wish to see the movie as the director intended and as it was shown at the theater will choose the original aspect and not the cropped version. No-one said SD should be smaller than 16:9, it was said that 4:3 should be smaller than 16:9, and that's easily done without any cropping. I think you're a bit confused over the constant height thing.

Old 4:3 movies will be shown in their entirety pillarboxed in the center of the screen, and 16:9+ movies will simply be wider, with the side masking retracted accordingly.

Gary

As a practical matter, 4:3 images processed through my Faroudja and shown using my entire screen look absolutely fine and I prefer them in the larger size. The Faroudja DCDI works very well on the signals coming in over cable except below Channel 8.

I only watch network TV on my home theater for HD sports or special events that are broadcast in HD. I have the option of receiving ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, and UPN over the air via my high def setup and that is what I use rather than the rather crappy cable signal for these.

Just so we're clear on this, I view my 4:3 setup as an interim step until 16:9 becomes really standard. Most of the 4:3 material I watch comes in over digital cable which at some point will switch to being fully 16:9. However, we also have a number of remade old movies in our DVD collection which we'll continue to watch in (not quite) 4:3.

I stand by my comment on the need for a lens with this projector. Light spill can be handled much more cheaply with masking so if one is on a tight budget, I would go this route rather than use a lens. Particularly since you still have light spill with any aspect ratio that is greater than 16:9.

Can't comment on the Carada screen except to note that IMO this projector benefits from the contrast enhancement of a gray screen.

I think Icon has a good idea about using two projectors. It definitely can save time on setup.

Dan: What I was trying to convey was not about the Carada in itself but rather in using black backing to the screen.

The implication by this, I suppose snide comment, and some of the other posts here show the utter lack of experience with using a big dish satellite receiver. So and so says he only watches movies on his 2.35:1 setup and that Hollywood only does them that way.

If that were the case then why do good movie theaters have adjustable masking for the flicks they show? If that were the case then why are the widescreen DVD's released with various W:H ratios and often they are not 2.35:1. A sampling of several of my widescreen DVD's also showed 2.20:1, 1.85:1 and 2.40:1. If so and so is such a movie watcher but rarely uses his HT because he doesn't watch movies that often, that says something about him and his under use of a major investment. Well as it turns out you all could be watching a bunch more movies every night and day if you had a big satellite dish. There are far more movie channels being broadcast on the big dish than on either cable, Direct TV and Dish Network. I know because I have them all.

Your reading comprehension is horrible. A constant height setup with adjustable masking for different ratios is exactly what I was talking about.

My use of my theater comes down to free time. A home theater is no more an "investment" than a luxury car. It's there for me to enjoy when I have time to enjoy it. Anyone using the term "investment" to refer to their theater needs to attend Cash Flow 101.

Also, you can at least use my name instead of "so and so". I think your opinions and knowledge about home theater are functionally worthless, but I still show you enough respect to refer to you by name.

I can see now that this thread will turn into yet another podium for you to prove that you're right and everyone else is wrong. I see no difference between people who tout the Ruby without exception and your faithful bleating regarding the Canons, other than the fact that they usually back up their opinions with thoughtful commentary and actual measurements instead of marketing foolishness like a contrast ratio of "2000:1 on live images", whatever that means.

Do you sell this projector?

Gary and ThirdKind,

I believe Icon Master is confused about constant height setups and aspect ratio. He stated:

Back to the old movies - their ration is 1.33:1 which is not precisely 4:3-> 1.25:1

Any standard calculator will show you that 4:3 is much closer to 1.33:1 than 1.25:1. If he cannot get the arithmetic correct, how do you expect him to understand a constant height setup?

There once was a guy that advocated the abolition of widescreen dvd's. He thought that the widscreen pictures were 4:3 images with the tops and bottoms masked off. The site is no longer working, but the remnants of references can be seen here:

http://www.angelfire.com/pa/ussdefiant/rebuttal.html

Wow.

Amazing how confused some people can be over what is really something very simple.

Gary

Third kind, I'm going to reiterate: You don't need more brightness with the Canons, ANY lens is going to add some distortion and you don't need more resolution at normal viewing distances because of the high fill factor of the LCOS chips and the high resolution of this projector. IMHO, not worth the major bucks ($1500) that the really good Panamorph costs and I have been told that the cheaper one DOES introduce noticeable distortion.


Hi Dan,

I think your source on the lower cost Panamorph must have been referring to an older model. The new U80 Panamorph is currently our lowest cost model and is actually based on what used to be the most expensive model. Typical distortion of our current products is less than 0.5% and it's actually less or absent with the Canons due to the slight pincushion of the projector lens.

Raneil, if you mean like black felt background around the screen, definitely. The Canons do have some light spill.

Hi Shawn, thanks for the update. May have to take another look at the Panamorphs. Do understand I very much liked my old P752 IMO it saved the Sanyo LCD projector I was using. Made a huge difference in the quality of the image. However, the Canon is light years above that right out of the box.

Dan

The implication by this, I suppose snide comment, and some of the other posts here show the utter lack of experience with using a big dish satellite receiver. So and so says he only watches movies on his 2.35:1 setup and that Hollywood only does them that way.

If that were the case then why do good movie theaters have adjustable masking for the flicks they show? If that were the case then why are the widescreen DVD's released with various W:H ratios and often they are not 2.35:1. A sampling of several of my widescreen DVD's also showed 2.20:1, 1.85:1 and 2.40:1. If so and so is such a movie watcher but rarely uses his HT because he doesn't watch movies that often, that says something about him and his under use of a major investment. Well as it turns out you all could be watching a bunch more movies every night and day if you had a big satellite dish. There are far more movie channels being broadcast on the big dish than on either cable, Direct TV and Dish Network. I know because I have them all.

However these additional movie channels are mostly telecast in 4:3 format. Does that keep me from enjoying the flick? No - of course not. Would I like to see them all in HiDef - of course but that will likely not happen in my lifetime if ever. So am I going to run upstairs like our friend here every time a movie or decent show is coming over in SD - Absolutely Not!

And who says that SD should be smaller than 16:9? That is only a rationalization made by folks with 16:9 projectors or TV sets who cannot blow up SD telecasts to their original proportion without distorting the image. EXAMPLE: Till recently the fights on HBO and Showtime were all sent out in SD. I can letterbox the SD fights too but they look far better in full screen 4:3 mode. Yep - the fighters are almost life size then and it feels like they are almost in the room. As to the picture quality - that depends on the source and cameras used but most of those movie channels being sent through on the big dish in SD format look far better than the compressed signal version of the same channels coming down on the small dishes or via cable. In fact the HiDef telecast coming trough on the big dish are also better in quality than their small dish and cable counterparts.

As too the issue of lost of image quality by the projector and those unused, wasted scan lines, the SX50 and SX60 are full 720p capable. If you want to spend extra money to fill the entire 4:3 LCOS panels and squeeze that image down to 16:9 you will gain about a third more vertical resolution (and zero horizontal) if the morph lens were perfect. That is not going to be noticeable. I am not seeing any pixilation as so and so did with his SX21. Maybe its my eyes or maybe its his old projector but the Canon units are sharp and you do not see the pixels unless you are inches from the screen. Sorry "kiddo" - no pixelations in our Canons...

Back to the old movies - their ration is 1.33:1 which is not precisely 4:3-> 1.25:1 but its very close and the old movies ARE WIDER THAN TALLER contrary to what was stated by so and so (His math has become a bit dyslexic after climbing up and down those stairs all day). "Casablanca" is another one of those oldies that is "4:3" and has to be seen big and not crunched into a dim 16:9 pillared letterbox to be truly appreciated.

How will I handle Canon's 16:9 if and when one comes out. Well I do have two projectors ceiling mounted - one is for backup and watching less critical stuff. That is an approach many could take. If I had a Ruby or "Q" I too would not waste their expensive bulbs on CNN telecasts but I wouldn't be running upstairs to watch it on TV either (First I don't have stairs and secondly if I did I am not in that good of shape to keep doing that.). I'd setup a secondary 4:3 projection unit for the other stuff - whatever that may be. Why waste a perfectly good HT room? If you got it use it!

Icon Master
So, how many screen widths back do you sit to watch SD material such that it looks good?

Your's was a long non-answer to my question. You were attacking people who use a dedicated HT for HD, and watch SD on a normal television. You'll note my question has nothing to do with aspect ratios. It's limited to the pleasurable distance for HD verses SD on a big screen setup.

For me, the viewing distance I prefer for HD is closer than that which I prefer for SD. In fact, the distance at which I watch HD makes SD material look pretty bad. I prefer watching CNN at normal television sized screens at normal tv distances, and movies in HD on big screens at close distances. That makes having a dedicated HT for HD and regular television for SD the right decision for me. I don't plan on re-arranging my furniture (and risers) when I switch content.

This has nothing to do with the SX60 though. Not really. I may well end up getting the sx60, and if I do, I will use it to watch mainly HD material, at distances that I find enjoyable. SD will be for the small screen, by-in-large.

So, how many screen widths back do you sit to watch SD material such that it looks good?

Your's was a long non-answer to my question. You were attacking people who use a dedicated HT for HD, and watch SD on a normal television. You'll note my question has nothing to do with aspect ratios. It's limited to the pleasurable distance for HD verses SD on a big screen setup.



Sorry about that. I was answering several posts in one reply and thought you were among those being cute and not serious. I sit at the same distance for both although sometimes I do creep up a bit close for Hidef telecasts myself. My screen width is 9 feet and my primary viewing sofa is back about 15 feet which is now directly under the SX60. If you do sit further back from SD telecasts the soft edges are less noticeable but the large dish movie channels telecasts are pretty "hot" and at times you can even forget you are watching SD. I cannot say the same for other SD sources.

4:3 is equal to 1.33:1. That so and so guy has me doing dyslexic math like him too where he had the screen height higher than the width. Old movies have the same width to height ratio as out SD broadcasts which is another plus for not giving up on 4:3 projectors till we get a lot more HD programming and HiDef DVD's.

Icon Master

other than the fact that they usually back up their opinions with thoughtful commentary and actual measurements instead of marketing foolishness like a contrast ratio of "2000:1 on live images", whatever that means.


In my posts I made it very clear up front that I do not have the tools to measure CR, lumens, do 1080p etc and that I was quoting specs from the dealer sales material. That is where the 2000:1 CR on actual images came from and it is folks like you who try to distort what I said. I did state that I also have a 2000:1 rated DLP projector and that the SX60's black in cinema mode appear to be on the same order. On actual measurement, very few here have the tools to make them. Do you?

I have never said the Canon units were perfect. There is always room for improvement but I did say they are the most versatile units in the below $10K price range and cost a lot less to own and run than Ruby's and Qualias. I also clearly pointed out the differences between these products and leave it to the intelligence of users here to decide what is the best choice for them, their budget and their HT setup. If they like big screen sizes and bright images without using special highly reflective screen material then the Canon units surpass all but the $15K and $20K three DLP units in that $10K to $20K price range. But don't take my word for it. Read the posts of those who own them.

I am authorized to sell the Realis units but confine my sales to local clients in my marketing area. I am not interested in selling them mailorder - especially to the picky group here.

Regardless of your rationalization on how little you use your HT and how you run upstairs to watch SD or network TV, you could use your HT more if you had a second low cost high lumen projector to do the dirty work and save some wear and tear on your sneakers and the stairs. Or perhaps in an very indirect way you are admitting that your HT is one of those dark, dim caves and you can only take being a bat for only so long. Well again, with a cheap, bright DLP or LCD 4:3 projector you can have a bit of light in that HT or yours and increase the use of your investment.

Icon Master

I too have Dish HDNET, could you tell me in what channel you get the HDNET test pattern?


They do this test pattern every now and then. It is done about 4 PM Eastern time and lasts for half an hour. If there is a regular schedule for this I do not know the particulars.

Icon Master

Richkorn,

I just noticed your post about using the Anthem D2. I'm very interested in this because I've been waiting for well over a year for the D1->D2 upgrade.

Maybe you could have Icon come over and demo his SX60 in your setup. Since you're local it could be a potential sale.

Otherwise, give Digital Connection a call and see if they have any more of their magic box's. (DTROVISION - DD-D12P) This will help you out with your HDCP woes with the SX50.

What screen are you using and what size?

Ken

With my SX50 I watch SD on a 102" screen sitting 1.75 screen widths back and as previously noted, except for the lower cable channels which are also available on HD OTA here, it works fine. This signal is processed through my old but still very capable Faroudja NRS.

Maybe I'm not so picky, I don't expect great things out of this signal to begin with. Also, I don't do this very often at all. But the SD image is drastically better than the Sanyo XP21N LCD using the same Faroudja previous setup.

One of the nice things about this projector is how reliable it is and how long the lamp life is when run on low lamp, which is my standard setting. I don't worry a lot about using it in a more casual manner because not only is lamp life long, but lamps are pretty reasonable when compared to a lot of other projectors.

Aside from the dust fix issue, which I will get taken care of when I go away for several weeks in July, I simply have no complaints about this projector. Nearly a year later, I still enjoy the very colorful, highly resolved and bright image. Blacks have actually improved a tad as the lamp has aged (brightness decrease most likely).

At some point (probably next year) I'll probably trade it for the SX60 to get the improved cinema features, lower noise and nice power focus and zoom.

Let me just say that I've been to a lot of shootouts and shows and seen most of the projectors that are widely discussed on this board. Personally speaking, I would have to spend a lot more money than I did before the real life improvement would be drastic. Sometimes I think we get fixated on measurements and picky details and neglect to savor the actual experience of watching the movie or sports event.

Hi Shawn, thanks for the update. May have to take another look at the Panamorphs. Do understand I very much liked my old P752 IMO it saved the Sanyo LCD projector I was using. Made a huge difference in the quality of the image. However, the Canon is light years above that right out of the box.

Dan

Understood. We are selling plenty of lenses for people with 1080p as well, so it all depends on what you are looking for. What's kind of interesting with the SXGA+ projectors is that with a good anamorphic lens you get 16:9 at 1400x1050 - about 75% of 1920x1080 for so much less. In addition, many folks consider that vertical resolution is the most important determinant of image quality (I can't explain why yet), so at 1050 lines the anamorphic canon really get's you there. Sorry for the marketing pitch. But I must say the current Panamorphs do seem like a natural fit for the canon projectors. I only wish they had the internal scaling for all the modes.

If I used a Panamorph with the SX50, one of the issues I'd have to deal with is how to handle the light spill problem of the projector. It has a very definite blue halo around the main image which I eliminated most of by shooting the image through a felt-covered baffle mounted about 8" in front of the lens.

Everyone will recall that JVC got rid of this problem by masking the LCOS chips themselves. I wonder if Canon did this on the SX60. If so, another major reason to upgrade IMO.

I've always thought the optimal, most flexible setup of all would be to have a 4:3 projector like the Canon and two Panamorphs mounted on a single long rail in front of the lens, one for 16:9 and one for 2.35:1. Depending on which one you're watching, you'd slide the appropriate Panamorph over in front of the lens.

But as you say, some type of scaling that would expand the 2.35 image to fit a full 4:3 would be required. Expanding the 16:9 to 4:3 is no problem, my DVD player will do that for me. At the risk of being a heretic and getting flamed, frankly I could do without 2.35 altogether. It's fine for a movie theater but many HTs including mine have limited width flexibility so I end up looking at a too small picture in 2.35.

By the time I get this figured out, 4:3 will be history anyway. :)

It may just be that by the time you get it figured out, you'll have a moveable Panamorph for your SXGA+ projector - a system where you can exchange the projector for a new 1080p in the future so you can use the entire setup for full res at both 16:9 and 2.35 :)

FWIW I did see a prototype optional lens mask accessory this year from Canon to reduce light spill when showing 16:9 It was not definite in terms of a future accessory. Also, as you know, the farther you are from the lens the better job this can do, and this mask was just kind of a clip-on arrangment right at the lens.

I use a PSO-SX21A with my SX50. (Same optics as PSO-100)

Works great with plenty of resolution. It makes a small but noticeable improvement over scaling to 1400x788.

Also, lets me work on my 1080P signal chain in case I upgrade to a 1080P projector someday.

Ken

Icon Master and DanHouck: You note above that you view from a distance of 15/9 = 1.67 and 1.75 screen widths, respectively. But I though that most Front Projectiion set-ups were usually viewed at a closer distance, typically ~ 1.5 screen widths, or even closer. (I'm new to FP and trying to learn!) Do you not sit this close because the PQ deteriorates too much, or is it just personal preference? Is 1080p resolution necessary to sit at </= 1.5?

Bill,
Where do you sit in the movie theater? If you like sitting on the front row, then by all means sit closer. Some prefer sitting in the back. On 4:3, I am about the same distance as Icon and Dan.

Dan,
Couldn't you try masking behind the lens like what was done on the JVCs?

Ericglo

Bill,
Where do you sit in the movie theater? If you like sitting on the front row, then by all means sit closer. Some prefer sitting in the back. On 4:3, I am about the same distance as Icon and Dan.Ericglo

Right now I sit ~ 10 to 11 ft from my Mits 73" dlp rptv but am hankering for a 'really big' screen, thus my interest in FP. If I didn't want a truly big screen experience, I would stay with my rptv (which is excellent). I'm thinking about a 120" diag screen from a distance of ~ 12.5 ft.

[I would need to view my Mits from a distance of 8 ft to be at 1.5 screen widths, and that is not practical in my room arrangment.]

On actual measurement, very few here have the tools to make them. Do you?

When I've reviewed projectors in the past, yes. I sold all that equipment when I sold my theater gear last year. Now that I'm rebuilding my theater, I imagine I'll be purchasing calibration and testing equipment again.


Regardless of your rationalization on how little you use your HT and how you run upstairs to watch SD or network TV, you could use your HT more if you had a second low cost high lumen projector to do the dirty work and save some wear and tear on your sneakers and the stairs. Or perhaps in an very indirect way you are admitting that your HT is one of those dark, dim caves and you can only take being a bat for only so long. Well again, with a cheap, bright DLP or LCD 4:3 projector you can have a bit of light in that HT or yours and increase the use of your investment.

I think all those lumens have singed your brain. Where did I say I don't watch TV in my theater because the projector is too dim? I made it pretty clear that it's the overall quality of SD sources at large screen sizes that keeps me out of the theater for TV watching. Not surprising though that your immediate solution is to throw a "cheap, bright DLP or LCD 4:3 projector" at the issue, which, ironically, would only make the problem worse.

You're one of those guys whose responses are so obviously inconsiderate of the original post that others are left to wonder just what is wrong with you. Maybe you should spend less time trying to inject uninspiring cleverness and not-so-subtle insults into your posts and more time thinking about whether your responses even counter the issue you're addressing.

Bill, it is personal preference plus with my previous XGA LCD, sitting much closer resulted in too much pixelation being observed. The Panamorph I had with that projector really helped that issue a lot.

Eric, trying to mask behind the lens is a big jump beyond my level of technical expertise when it comes to projectors. Also, I don't want to jeopardize the very nice three year warranty on this projector.

Yes Shawn, I noticed the light spill masking fix I came up with works better as the distance between it and the projector grows. Quite drastically, actually.

I toyed with the idea that some have applied to other projectors, using a lens cap with the appropriate hole cut in it. But when I experimented on this, it was clear the mask location further out worked much better.

Ken,

Icon is more than welcome to come by; I could use the input. Hey, I can use all the knowledge out there, especially if he is familiar with the D2. I am definitely upgrading to the SX60.

My familiarity with the stuff you all talk about in the forum is very limited at best. My interest was in creating a media room. The shape and the feeling of the room came from my perspective as a builder - expert renovator. My interest in computer systems, programming, networking etc piqued my interest in the planning, equipment and wiring. My challenge was to achieve an incredible media room, but one that is not noticeable. A stealth media room, until the A/V equipment is powered on. In each house I design/ build I challenge myself with the introduction of a few unique and extraordinary features. Since it wasn’t a retrofit space constraints were not a consideration.

To enhance the viewing I built out a 114” wide by 108” high and 18” deep alcove to receive the picture. The center speaker (Magnaplaner C3) & subwoofer are concealed in a 35” bench-cabinet built along the bottom of the alcove. The remaining screen height (108” less the 35”) equals 73” in height and still 114” in width. On each side of the 18” offsets are 2 sets of Magneplanar CC3 speakers. (48” * 10” by 1”). The set of speakers on each side of the picture is an 8’ wall of sound. I replicated the same speaker configuration for the L&R Rear surrounds. The center surrounds are still under consideration.

The SX50 and the rest of the equipment are in an adjacent room. It shoots through an opening in the wall between the two rooms. I wanted the media room strictly for viewing and all equipment out of sight. The equipment , Cable , Satellite boxes, Anthem D2, Anthem Amp, Media Server, Sirius Radio and DVD (replacing the Cambridge Audio DVD with the Toshiba HD-A1 on order! ) is located in a closet directly underneath the projector (ceiling mounted). The ventilation system blows from under the house through the media cabinetry up and onto the SX50.

The absence of all extraneous items except seating and other necessary amenities promotes the viewing experience I am using the wall as a screen, I know this is considered a negative. . A permanent screen would negate the subtlety of the room. I prepped the viewing area within the alcove until it is smoother than glass, then it was primed a dozen times and finished it with 4 coats of a flat screen silver colored paint . The picture is framed by the 18” wall offset. Of course, as a builder, I was to trying to build a better screen; it was not a monetary issue. If I determine that a screen is better than this setup then of course I will buy one... It may appear that I am not enhancing/providing the atmosphere needed for a pure movie watching experience. To the contrary the media experience was my primary objective .In my unprofessional opinion I think the picture is great. I would like another opinion of someone like Icon for comparison.
Some of many, many questions that brought me to this forum are: - is a screen is needed, - how a screen can change into so many shapes to accommodate all the different projector settings.

Bill, it is personal preference plus with my previous XGA LCD, sitting much closer resulted in too much pixelation being observed. The Panamorph I had with that projector really helped that issue a lot.

Dan, thanks for the reply--I certainly agree that all of this is personal pref, there being no one 'right' answer.

But IF the image quality were good enough, would you like to sit 'up close and personal'? In reading many of these FP threads, it does seem that '1.5 x screen width' is the rule of thumb that I perceive. And this surely is closer than rptv's are usually viewed from. (But never having had a FP set-up, so I'm truly in the dark!)

1.5 to 2.0 is the range typically cited. We are not sitting up closer with this projector simply because we don't want to--the image quality IS good enough. You could easily sit at 1.0 screen width and there would be very little perception of screen door.

Rich, please FEEL FREE to post some photos of this setup for us. It sounds fantastic. There's quite a large number of folks using paint for screens, if done right it apparently works pretty good.

Dan

1.5 to 2.0 is the range typically cited. We are not sitting up closer with this projector simply because we don't want to--the image quality IS good enough. You could easily sit at 1.0 screen width and there would be very little perception of screen door.

Understand--thanks again!

Rich, please FEEL FREE to post some photos of this setup for us. It sounds fantastic. There's quite a large number of folks using paint for screens, if done right it apparently works pretty good.

Dan

Dan,
Where do I post pictures?

Richkorn,

That does sound like a sweet setup.

Post pics: http://gallery.avsforum.com/
Checkout Screen GOO: http://gallery.avsforum.com/

Special screen paint formulas.

How do you hide such a large flat surface? I would have thought drop down or popup.

Looking fwd to your pics!

Ken

I think all those lumens have singed your brain. Where did I say I don't watch TV in my theater because the projector is too dim? I made it pretty clear that it's the overall quality of SD sources at large screen sizes that keeps me out of the theater for TV watching. Not surprising though that your immediate solution is to throw a "cheap, bright DLP or LCD 4:3 projector" at the issue, which, ironically, would only make the problem worse.

You're one of those guys whose responses are so obviously inconsiderate of the original post that others are left to wonder just what is wrong with you. Maybe you should spend less time trying to inject uninspiring cleverness and not-so-subtle insults into your posts and more time thinking about whether your responses even counter the issue you're addressing.

Guilty as charged on both counts! Yes the SX50 has singed my brain and eyes too! Secondly, I made several giant assumptions from you saying you had a HT in your basement implying to me you had a dark cave based setup because you said you had a fixed 2.35:1 based system. Since I know of no 16:9 HT (not commercial) based projector that has the lumen output of the Canon LCOS projectors except the two 3 DLP models, I assumed you had something else. Congrats on being someone who can afford a three DLP owner!!! OOPs! Have I made another mistake? Perhaps you have a typical 1000 lumen projector hitting a six foot screen and you think you have a "real" home theater? Maybe I'd better keep my sunburned brain's mouth shut until you tell us what projector and screen size you have that makes you so proud yet unwilling to use it very much on SD programming (where again I assumed that its too dim or expensive to use/waste that way).

And again you are correct - I'm also guilty about being not very subtle. Kindly tell us how big your screen is and which projector you have that has the lumens to compete with the Canons being discussed here. OOPs,there I go again. You said you found SD too poor a quality to waste your presious system on and it was not the screen size or brightness at issue. Oh, but it was YOU who totally ignored my comments about a large satellite dish having good high quality SD signals which the Canon projects just as fine as wine. So maybe it is you that is not making sense here unless you have a big satellite dish as a signal source. Then it is you who is popping off trying to be a 2.35 to one SNOB!

Well highhanded, cave dwelling, 2.35:1 snobs are not welcome in our pedestrian, misguided, "big and bright loving" 4:3 Canon message threads. Sire, come on back after you install a big satellite dish AND you learn how to talk down to us old fashioned 4:3 peasants.

Icon Master

Which tools do I need to adjust all the levels on an sx60?

blah blah blah

Icon Master

God you're a tool.

God you're a tool.

I actually think part of my ruling out of the SX60 had something to do w/ the affiliation ... Canon marketing would do themselves proud to tighten the leash a bit.

I'd just like to jump in here to back up what Icon says about the big dish SD signal - at least how it was 8 years ago when we still used C-band. Short of some exotic, stand-alone HD system, it was the equal of the then-still-new DVD images.

Of course our display then was the one we still are using now for every day viewing - a then-top-end Toshiba 36" CRT interlaced TV.

We have an HTPC-driven NEC 9PG+ CRT FP in our basement HT (a place as dark as any cave has ever been) and on very rare occasions we get a good-enough analog SD signal on our BEV system to watch it on the NEC through the HTPC's capture card and de-interlacing software. The resulting image is very watchable on our 100" diagonal screen from approximately that same seating distance.

I know from experience that the SD image would be even better from C-band.

This makes sense when one realizes the purpose for which the whole TV-signal-on-satellite system was created in the first place.

Over the years the SD signal on BEV has gotten so bad that if our present urban living location allowed it, we'd go back to C-band and really-big-dish digital in a second, and the little dish would go directly to the trash, where it belongs.

Don't be surprised if after the promotion of little-dish HD, and the numbers of HD channels "goes north", the quality of the final signal "goes south". What the TV commercials say will still be correct - "digital quality, capable of delivering a signal superior to analog" - but what will be delivered is very a high quality, but highly-compressed signal that will only look marginal on a really big display.

To determine how bad the final signal will be, the few people controlling it will use a "money gauge". They'll adjust signal quality so that the money-gauge print-out has just the right slope.

But look on the bright side - there'll be a lot of crappy images to choose from!

Also, as you know, the farther you are from the lens the better job this can do, and this mask was just kind of a clip-on arrangment right at the lens.


"Mask at the panel or mask at the screen but nowhere in between." Shakespeare1080P

I'd just like to jump in here to back up what Icon says about the big dish SD signal - at least how it was 8 years ago when we still used C-band. Short of some exotic, stand-alone HD system, it was the equal of the then-still-new DVD images...

I know from experience that the SD image would be even better from C-band.

This makes sense when one realizes the purpose for which the whole TV-signal-on-satellite system was created in the first place.


Herve -

Thanks for coming forth with the "C" band quality info. The "C" band still is a superior source of SD and even HiDef broadcasts and I just renewed by subscription for one more year. These 2.35:1 / 16:9 "snobs" (for lack of a better term) are so willing to pass on ten times the programing available because, pee-u, "It isn't in the right format and I'll be wasting my projector's bulbs life viewing an inferior image. Well Excuuusee- meee for trying to (obviously unsuccesfully) burst your snobby attitude bubble.

I have to admit that renewing the "C" band is getting more difficult to do since they lost the NFL package. That is on Direct TV only now and I am an NFL fan. But it is the far wider variety of movie channels and superior SD image quality that keep me from cancelling the "C" deal. I suppose the handwriting is on the wall for "C" band. Very few new "big" dishes are being sold and the profit deals for the installers from Direct TV are very attractive but the SD image quality on both small dish program providers "sucks" compared to big dish "C" band.

These 2.35 or nothing folks can keep their "attitude" while we sit back with our 4:3 Canon projectors and enjoy our big screen home theaters to the fullest - day or night - light are dark (in our HT). Most here have heard the old expression about cutting off one's nose to spite themselves - that is what our "snobbish" 2.35 only HT brethren are doing. But at least with the Ruby and the "Q" they have access to their hidden service menus and they are having a ball tweaking those SXRD Sonys trying to get them to half the lumens of the SX50 or SX60. But it makes them happy - we 4:3 peasants are happy because they are, in their ignorant bliss, happy too!

A-men,

Icon Master

P.S. Notice how "Thirdkind" still never stepped up to tell us his screen size or projector make and model in his little used, well preserved home theater? What is he hiding? Sorta' reminds me of those old guys who have to drive around in hot, expensive sports cars because of defencie... well you know... Our 4:3 SX50's and SX60's are obviously too pedestrian for folks like that - who need to show off and brag about their expensive cars, err, projectors.

I actually think part of my ruling out of the SX60 had something to do w/ the affiliation ... Canon marketing would do themselves proud to tighten the leash a bit.

And you call yourself a poet? A true poet seeks the truth and is not influenced by small minded "Gods tools," err, foolish peasants like me. Poets see the bigger picture but your "picture" will be ever smaller with any other choice but Canon.

But allas, in the end it is the poet here that is the loser - not me or Canon. May the farce stay with you.

Icon Master

Which tools do I need to adjust all the levels on an sx60?

Good question!

If I want to do a full SX60 calibration and lumen rating - what tools and software do I need to do a professional level setup/test?

Icon Master

Colorfacts with the Spyder colorimiter or better still the Gretag Macbeth Eye One spectroradiometer. UMR does cheaper software (Accucal) which works with the Eye One so those are two options. A much cheaper option which requires a bit more leg work is to use the SpyderTV colorimiter with Raders Excel spreadsheet. A dedicated light meter is useful for contrast and lumen readings.

As for 'snobby' 2.35:1 owners, you'll have to say that about theaters around the world and their patrons since I doubt many (if any) are still 4:3.

Gary

Notice how "Thirdkind" still never stepped up to tell us his screen size or projector make and model in his little used, well preserved home theater? What is he hiding?

When I've reviewed projectors in the past, yes. I sold all that equipment when I sold my theater gear last year. Now that I'm rebuilding my theater, I imagine I'll be purchasing calibration and testing equipment again.

Bolded for emphasis. That's at least twice now where simply paying attention to what others say instead of running your mouth would've provided the information you seek.

Reading comprehension, my friend. Reading comprehension.

I can talk about what I owned previously, however, since it concerns you--not me--so much.

My last projector was an Optoma H79. Prior to that, I owned a Hitachi 5500, JVC SX21, Sharp 10K, and Sharp 12K. I've also tested the Sim2 300E and Domino 30H in my theater, but didn't really like either one. The award for most natural image goes to the SX21. Contrast was merely acceptable though. Most striking image goes to the H79. Great contrast and minimal DLP artifacts.

The screen I used was a 92" diagonal 16:9 matte white Da-Lite. For my viewing distance and source material (primarily DVD), this was enough. I recently moved and now have a larger room, hence the plan to use a 2.35:1 screen that will probably be the same height as my current screen (45"), but wider. The ceiling is a bit low in my finished basement, otherwise I'd go a bit larger.

I've been in my new house since the first week of April, but I'm waiting to see what else the market has to offer before jumping back into home theater.

Colorfacts ...
As for 'snobby' 2.35:1 owners, you'll have to say that about theaters around the world and their patrons since I doubt many (if any) are still 4:3.
Gary


Gary -

Thank you for the calibration info.

On the movie theater screen W:H ratio issue, many theaters seem to be showing video advertising and previews between features and they are using regular 4:3 not 2.35:1 projectors because they need a big and bright image to show their large "movie" screens. So like our home theaters, movie theaters are showing different types of content with different screen width to height ratios and that still includes 4:3 video content.

No Gary, the day is still far, far out in the future when all video content is native wide screen and even then the old stuff - the 4:3 video, movies, historical footage, etc - of yesterday to now will be lingering out there forever. 4:3 will never die and it won't even simply fade away like the old soldiers. It will be with human kind forever.

Sure we all at some point in time will switch to 16:9 home theater systems - assuming we live long enough to see the overwhelming majority of TV programing and DV';s being delivered in HiDef widescreen format. But as of today, if you flip through the hundreds of satellite channels only a few network and premium movie channels are in HiDef and even those are not full time HiDef except but a few like HDNET, Discovery HD, etc. Even HBOH was sending sends out SD programming and even movies as recently as last night.

Perhaps "snobby" 2.35 to one owners is the wrong term? If they only watch 2.35 programming on their expensive HT systems as they boast, maybe "silly and wasteful" is more accurate... but snobby does describe the attitude of that bunch when they talk down to us "stupid" 4:3 projector HT enthusiasts. Considering the above programming discussion it is obvious who are the snobby and "foolish" among us.

Icon Master

Icon,

They show 4:3 content (adverts etc) on a 2.35:1 screen. When the adverts are done, the curtains pull back for the 16:9 or 2.35:1 main feature.

4:3 is fine if you want to watch adverts, but for movies you need 16:9 or 2.35:1 since the vast majority of movies are made in those formats now. Other than 'A Clockwork Orange' (1.66:1 IIRC), all the movies I've watched over the past 5 years have been 16:9 or 2.35:1. When was the last 4:3 movie made? I can't even remember if I've watched a 4:3 movie on my pj...

I think ignoring the two most common movie formats is probably more foolish than trying to stick to 4:3 unless you want to watch old TV programming. Here in the UK most new tv productions are 16:9 and I would think the US is the same. This is home theater we're talking about after all, not tv viewing.

I can't see the point in buying a 4:3 pj if all I'm going to watch is 16:9 and 2.35:1 movies,

Of course, if you have a lot of older 4:3 movies and you want to watch them taller than 16:9 and scope then a 4:3 pj is the answer, but it isn't the answer for everyone. If Canon made a 16:9 SXRD pj I'm sure it would get a lot more sales. If they even used the same panel but only used the middle 16:9 part I reckon that would generate more sales too,

Gary.

Perhaps "snobby" 2.35 to one owners is the wrong term? If they only watch 2.35 programming on their expensive HT systems as they boast, maybe "silly and wasteful" is more accurate... but snobby does describe the attitude of that bunch when they talk down to us "stupid" 4:3 projector HT enthusiasts. Considering the above programming discussion it is obvious who are the snobby and "foolish" among us.

Who said 2.35:1 screen owners only watch scope material? They use masking for narrower ratios, just like theaters do. Setting up a scope screen and using it only to watch scope films would indeed be wasteful seeing as a large percentage of films, both old and new, are composed in narrower ratios.

I don't recall anyone calling 4:3 projector owners "stupid" either. Different projectors suit different users. If anything, I've seen you take far more shots at 16:9 projector owners than the other way around.

I've always found it odd when people rabidly promote and defend their purchase decisions to other people whose needs may be completely different from their own.

I must agree with Icon Master on the 4:3 ratio. I'm sure 2/3 of what we have on our DVDs is 'Standard' (still an accurate application of the word) or Full Screen though, yes, I do prefer Widescreen. The SX60 (and SX50) are the best value for both ratios, at this time. I have a panamorph lens and a PC that outputs full/widescreen (how's that for terminology?) use of the SX50's fullscreen mode, though the widescreen movies are still beautiful without the lens and only partial use of the SX50/60 native 4:3 ratio. Standard 4:3 ratio will be around for a long, long time, just as we still see many black & white movies (and TV shows too) to this day, though 'Black & White' has been pretty much gone since the '60's or so. TCM even shows silent films on occasion. As long as these films are around (forever, maybe even?) we will always have 'standard' video (at the worse we may end up calling it 'sub-standard, but we will have it none-the-less). These films are naturally 'pillar-boxed' on native 16:9 screens which, in contrast with the SX50/60's perspective, makes the image smaller (I lower my screen on standard video and can 'follow the yellow brick road' right there with a bright, sharp-focused image of Dorothy on a screen 7' tall!

I will be hanging on to the SX50 until Canon (or somebody) makes a projector in an exact pixel to pixel ratio with HD or Blu-Ray discs at the affordable price Canon does with the SX series.

Icon, I notice some of my movie-viewing guests (and I myself too) even squint their eyes on some of the brighter scenes of various movies with snow or bright sunlight, ect.... projected by the SX50. Any other SX50/60 people notice that?

Dan, I too see light around the image (including the left and right sides), just as I see light above and below the image of a letterboxed movie, and somewhat under and above on a 4:3 movie. You're not alone!

I think that overall, there are fractionally more movies that were made in 4:3 than all the other movies ratios added together, but they stopped making 4:3 movies a long time ago so now new releases are mostly 16:9 or scope. If you don't intend watching new movies and/or have a lot of old ones, then 4:3 is the obvious choice. if you watch more new releases, then widescreen is the obvious choice. There's no right or wrong, just what's right for you. Someone telling someone else they are a snob because their system preferences don't fit in with theirs or their marketing hype is not doing anyone any favours.

If you're squinting then your image is too bright. Like many things there are standards and for movie theaters there is a recommended amount of reflected light which is 12ft lamberts. For a tv or plasma it is around 36ft lamberts IIRC. You can reduce the lumen output by adding an ND filter to your pj lens. An ND2 will reduce the lumens by approx half, and an ND 4 to about 25%. Reducing by half doesn't look as dim as it sounds - you need to dim an image to around 18% of its original value before your eyes perceive what they think is a drop of 50%, so an ND4 might work better. You will also notice a reduction im light spill/halo around the screen, and in image noise too. As the lamp dims with age you can remove the filter to regain some brightness.

I find that having 10ft lamberts (or less, down to a minimum or 7FL) gives a more cinematic experience with little or no image noise. Any lower than 7FL begins to look dim though it is still quite watchable (4FL can be quite watchable believe it or not, but you need a reasonable amount of contrast for it to work and a fully light controlled room).

Of course if you don't like the set-up of a movie theater then following those recommendations won't suit you at all.

Gary

Gary, thanks for the detailed discussion on brightness. I prefer a brighter setup than the numbers you used but I have considered using an ND filter to dim her down a bit. May pursue that further.

As for aspect ratio, my personal preference is a system that handles all three very well. I like the idea of starting with a high resolution 4:3 projector and using lenses for BOTH 16:9 and 2.35:1. However, I am very much in the minority here and will likely end up with a lens equipped 16:9 projector and 16:9 screen in the next iteration of my HT.

Let's remember we have a huge diversity in HOW we use our HTs and what our personal preferences are. Avoiding judgments and "good/bad" evaluations of the preferences of others in this regard is desirable IMO. I like to see how others are approaching HT setups from different directions as it gives me the opportunity to pick and choose solutions that suit my own preferences.

Thanks again to Icon for his review of the SX60 and to all the excellent comments and debate on this thread. :)

Dan and Icon: I would suggest that both of you read the article posted at Secrets of Home Theater entitled "Understanding Contrast Ratios for Display Devices" Part IV, 2 of 5, it indicates that as our eyes age color sensitivity goes down which means " that we need more differentiation (or more CR "contrast ratio") between levels to be able to see them as our eyes age. However, we might want briter whites as we age and our eye's ability to pick up light decreases."

Dan and Icon: I would suggest that both of you read the article posted at Secrets of Home Theater entitled "Understanding Contrast Ratios for Display Devices" Part IV, 2 of 5, it indicates that as our eyes age color sensitivity goes down which means " that we need more differentiation (or more CR "contrast ratio") between levels to be able to see them as our eyes age. However, we might want briter whites as we age and our eye's ability to pick up light decreases." I hope that this will set to rest the endless and I mean endless and pointless discussion regarding big and bright verses dark.

I also would like all the other "experts" to read this as well. This was not meant to be said as an attack on anyone but I think everyone needs to reevaluate their attitudes in how they approach this discussion.

Dan and Icon: I would suggest that both of you read the article posted at Secrets of Home Theater entitled "Understanding Contrast Ratios for Display Devices" Part IV, 2 of 5, it indicates that as our eyes age color sensitivity goes down which means " that we need more differentiation (or more CR "contrast ratio") between levels to be able to see them as our eyes age. However, we might want briter whites as we age and our eye's ability to pick up light decreases." I hope that this will set to rest the endless and I mean endless and pointless discussion regarding big and bright verses dark.

Raneil -

We are way ahead of that article. We had a while back a huge "discussion" in the SX50 thread on how the human eyes ability to discern color also diminishes with reductions in brightness. It deals with the rod and cone photoreceptors in the eye - with the more numerous rods (120 million) that handle night vision being far less sensitive to color than the cones (6 to 7 million). Even techy guys like Darin had a hard time accepting this but this is why I contend that many of us - perhaps with an age bias factored in - prefer bigger and brighter capable projectors.

When viewing low lumen video images even in dark caves, the eyes color sensitivity simply is not there. I have tried to eye calibrate the SX60 using the three color digital setup DVD and then have been going back and forth between the Cinema and sRGB (calibrated) modes (with sRGB being the closest to 6500K). I must say that I still seem to prefer the sRGB over the Cinema mode even though the blacks are blacker, etc. The image is dimmer and because of that it takes these eyes a bit of time to adjust to the change. Once that happens the dimmer image is not so bad but then I notice that my eyes cannot discern color as well at lower lumens. Below is a mini reference for you guys to check out and there are many others. Just do an "Eyes rods and cones" Google search and then maybe some of the folks here who have the dimmer 16:9 projectors will see why we Canon folks are so happy with out big and bright images from the Canon LCOS units.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/vision/rodcone.html

Gary - Here in the USA standard network TV is only in widescreen format for the prime time evening shows and not all of them are doing that yet. The vast majority of out TV programming is still 4:3. While we call out hobby here Home Theater, and indeed we watch movies, many of us also watch TV programming, sports, classic movies like on the Turner Classic Movie channel mentioned previously, and so on. Just because we use the word "Theater" does not mean to many of us that we will be using is to view 2.35:1 current movie material always. Also I see the HiDef HBO programing (and other premium channels) when in widescreen format still come across in other than 2.35:1 W:H ratios. I suppose a wise course here is to all agree that we can disagree on how we use our systems. But for sure having a big bright, relatively inexpensive, high lumen, 4:3 Canon LCOS based projector is the smartest way to go now! :)

Again as a redundant reminder, what seems to be escaping you 2.35:1 guys, the SX50 and SX60 do a full, true 720P within their 4:3 image frame so unless you have a Ruby or "Q" the chances are that you do not have a 1080p unit meaning you do not have a sharper image than us Canon users. And it is further highly likely that your 720P projector is shooting out far less lumens than our Canon units even within the 720P portion of the image frame. Do you get it yet??????????????????

Icon Master

I suppose a wise course here is to all agree that we can disagree on how we use our systems. But [everyone who doesn't agree with me is an illiterate, incompetent, moronic, snob for not understanding that] having a big bright, relatively inexpensive, high lumen, 4:3 Canon LCOS based projector is the smartest way to go now! :)
We need a :sarcasm: emoticon

Projector reviews.com has announced that they will be conducting a review before the end of this month, of the sx60, at the request of Canon as a home theater projector! I don't know of any manufacturer making such a request unless they believe they're going to get raves for their product.
The review has not been posted yet. Still waiting...

We need a :sarcasm: emoticon

:rolleyes:


It looks like we are back on the Icon merry-go-round.

Ericglo

Hopefully someone with more technical aptitude, less ego, and an open mind will get their hands on the SX60 soon and provide some useful data.

Raneil, I have read it long ago and as Icon points out, "now for the rest of the story". Contrast without brightness does not work for these aging eyes. Also, the dimmer the projector the more actual CR is reduced by scattered or other light.

What I like about the SX60 approach is the "drop down" filter that can be used when you can have your theater completely dark, but not use when watching football for example, where you need to be able to find your way to the beer cooler and popcorn without tripping over something. :)

I started a thread (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=682185) about that article a couple of days ago. It was written by Darinp and Dan (unless you have a time machine) you couldn't have read it long ago.

I am curious of what percentage of SX50 owners will upgrade to the SX60.

Ericglo

"color sensitivity goes down which means " that we need more differentiation (or more CR "contrast ratio") between levels "

Color sensitivity is not the same as brightness sensitivity, which is what CR refers to.

Even techy guys like Darin had a hard time accepting this but this is why I contend that many of us - perhaps with an age bias factored in - prefer bigger and brighter capable projectors.The things you make up never cease to amaze me.

Based on what I've seen here, other people don't have a problem seeing the bluish absolute black level with the SX50, but you claim to not see it. So, maybe your color vision is especially bad down low.

Yes, brighter can make it easier to see many things. That includes artifacts. But for some reason there are people who don't see these artifacts, so they don't consider those a downside of going really bright.

Each person needs to choose what is important to them, as always. And that includes screen size and aspect ratio. In many real rooms going with 4:3 would mean a narrower screen because those rooms are height limited in that case. And other rooms are width limited depending on aspect ratio. Those who just look at their own room and don't consider other people's are likely to make ridiculous statements and misleading people (on top of the purposely misleading things some people try to get away with).

As I've said before, I think Canon would be much better off with a more credible spokesperson here.
Raneil, I have read it long ago and as Icon points out, "now for the rest of the story".Since I didn't finish it very long ago and it just got published, you are probably thinking of a different article.

We need a :sarcasm: emoticonI thought it was ;).

"color sensitivity goes down which means " that we need more differentiation (or more CR "contrast ratio") between levels "

Color sensitivity is not the same as brightness sensitivity, which is what CR refers to.What I said in the article was:
... when in fact lower Contrast Sensitivity scores mean that we need more differentiation (or more CR) between levels to be able to see them as our eyes age. However, we also might want brighter whites as we age and our eye's ability to pick up light decreases.I didn't really cover the color aspect there.

--Darin

Perhaps we can get back to talking about hardware.

After a lot of consideration, I've decided to order the SX60 over the SX6.
Delivery date is a little uncertain since it appears that Canon has sold a lot of them :-)

Anyway, my hardware question. It's a simple one I hope.
A lot of my devices have component outputs (ie Y, Pb, Pr) on BNC connectors.
Is a special cable required to plug into the projector inputs?

tom

On My SX60

Upper Row
Input terminal 1= DVI
Input terminal 2=VGA mini D-Sub 15 Pin, Input Analog PC signal, composite Vide
Input terminal 3 = VGA mini D-Sub 15 Pin, Output analog PC signal

Second Row

Input terminal 1 - Audio In
Input terminal 2 - Video composite in
Input terminal 3 - SVideo
Input terminal 4 - Service Port jack

Next level
Input terminal 1 USB data only no video

Hope this is what you wantes


Input terminal

A lot of my devices have component outputs (ie Y, Pb, Pr) on BNC connectors.
Is a special cable required to plug into the projector inputs?

tom

The cable for componnent input is provided in the box.

OK so I have the Toshiba HD DVD & The cable box going through the Anthem D@. Pictyre quality is terrrible lots of greens. WHen I directly hook said compnents directly to SX 60 I get a great picture, although it ismuch smaller than the SX50 by at least 60%

Does anyone know why the D2 cause this. I have begun with factory settings and only changed the Source input for Cable & DVD to HDMI, and Video Input to Optical. Sound works fine?

Anyway, my hardware question. It's a simple one I hope.
A lot of my devices have component outputs (ie Y, Pb, Pr) on BNC connectors.
Is a special cable required to plug into the projector inputs?

If the projector has RCA inputs, you'll either need a cable with BNC connectors on one end and RCA connectors on the other, or you can purchase adapters that fit on the connectors.

For example, this adapter (http://www.avcable.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=VA-MT15&Category_Code=RCA-ADAPTER-MALE) converts a female RCA input into a female BNC input.

Hopefully someone with more technical aptitude, less ego, and an open mind will get their hands on the SX60 soon and provide some useful data.

If this isn't the pot calling the kettle black.... What a comment from someone who goes upstairs and watches most of his programming on regular TV sets when they aren't in 2.35 to one format and who has yet to come forth here with his projector make/model and screen size. My, aren't "we" very open and objective Mr. Deceiving-kind.

Icon Master

The things you make up never cease to amaze me.

I didn't really cover the color aspect there.
--Darin


No Darin - you did not cover color sensitivity in your rather good article. It is a shame you are so CR focused you miss the bigger picture that most of the programming and movies we watch are in color. I don't deny CR is important too, but discerning color is also and you cannot escape the fact that the lower lumen projector that you favor with its "derived" momentary higher CR ratios using dynamic Irises don't give enough lumens to drive bigger screen sizes unless you use a super highly reflective material to offset their lumen deficiency. Thus you are forced to live with smaller screen sizes to get the lamberts up and you need view in absolute darkness to avoid CR loss and give the human eye a decent chance to discern the colors in the video.

So Darin, show me where i made up this issue regarding the science of Rods and Cones in the human eye that you have so obviously skirted. You also seem to spend much of your time trying to squeeze more lumens out of your Ruby by tweaking its Iris settings. Why do you do that if its CR is so high? What is lacking there Darin? Again you remind me of that time I spent almost a year trying to make an Apple II into a Mac. Well you are, in your own way, trying to justify your low lumen Ruby with this great discourse on CR and yet you are still trying to make it "brighter" like a Canon Realis projector. Good Luck! I failed to make my Apple II into a Mac and finally bought a Mac. You need to ditch that "Ruby" obsession of yours and move on too.

No, I am not a spokesperson for Canon. But if I am Canon LCOS biased, then you certainly are equally and more so Sony SXRD biased. You are a clever fellow though and I enjoy watching your techniques of smearing folks who don't agree with you and turning things around to suit your own purposes and positions. I cannot wait to see your article on how rods and cones in the human eye are irrelevant and how, if you have adequate CR and a dynamic iris in you projector's lens, nothing else matters.

Icon Master

Darin, you're right, I'm thinking of previous discussions on this topic.

As for blueish blacks, that's really not an issue in my setup either. I did back the blue level off a tad and the grey of the Firehawk screen may also affect this. By comparison to what I observed on the earlier JVC LCOS projectors like the SX21, it is very minor in deed.

Again, based on my practical-level observations of a fair number of projectors over the years I've been a participant here, I feel that LCD and LCOS projectors benefit from using a screen like the Firehawk as opposed to a white screen.

There's no question that the improved CR of the Canon (I operate mine only on low lamp) improves my perception of image quality and detail. However, having been able to compare this projector to higher CR but much lower lumen output projectors, I personally still am willing to give up some CR to get the punch of the brighter image.

There's a lot of great information on this thread, it would be nice if we could discuss things without a bunch of backbiting.

If this isn't the pot calling the kettle black.... What a comment from someone who goes upstairs and watches most of his programming on regular TV sets when they aren't in 2.35 to one format and who has yet to come forth here with his projector make/model and screen size. My, aren't "we" very open and objective Mr. Deceiving-kind.

Oh. My. God.

I'm not quoting myself again. You know, the post where I clearly explain I don't currently have a projector because I sold all my theater gear last year. The post where I explain what projectors I previously owned and the screen size I used.

I hope everyone reading this realizes it's proof positive Icon Master never actually absorbs what he reads unless it conforms with his narrow view of what's "right". That, or you're functionally illiterate.

Also, your insults are exceedingly lame.

Why hasn't Icon Master been asked by the AVS Moderators to tone it down or else? He is on my ignore list, however, it is hard to miss what he is saying from all of the quotes in other posts.

Wow.... watched a movie using the Toshiba HD DVD via the D2 through the SX60 and the picutre was absolutloey incredibly clear. For the first time I could aprreciate the over used saying that you can feel as thouhg the people in the picture are in your room.

I'm definitely jealous. Being between projectors during the launch of HD-DVD, and soon BluRay, is most painful.

Glad you're enjoying your SX60 :)

Thus you are forced to live with smaller screen sizes to get the lamberts up and you need view in absolute darkness to avoid CR loss and give the human eye a decent chance to discern the colors in the video. My screen is 10' wide, so your claim of me being forced to live with smaller screen sizes is just another of your false assumptions. And if you watch with lights on then you are affecting the correctness of your colors by killing the CR (and thus washing out colors and decreasing the differences between levels that help our eyes discern things, including color).
So Darin, show me where i made up this issue regarding the science of Rods and Cones in the human eye that you have so obviously skirted.Read what I quoted again. I haven't seen anybody disagree with the science of rods and cones (I'm sure some of us have discussed the inability of the human eye to see colors in very dim images before you ever brought it up), despite you making up a claim otherwise. BTW: The issue is more complicated that this, but the cones allow us to see color down to around one ten thousandths of a ft-lambert. If your whites were 30 ft-lamberts, that would be the absolute black level if the on/off CR was approximately 300,000:1.
You also seem to spend much of your time trying to squeeze more lumens out of your Ruby by tweaking its Iris settings.You are confused again. Your claim isn't true.
You are a clever fellow though and I enjoy watching your techniques of smearing folks who don't agree with you and turning things around to suit your own purposes and positions.I will never apologize for pointing out when somebody is being dishonest and trying to mislead people. I'm sure it bugs you that you didn't get away with it when you tried to mislead people about the relative prices of the Ruby and the SX50 and that is one reason you seem to have this weird fascination that gets you to keep bringing my name up. And we can go over your dishonesty on that subject (or maybe you want to claim that even as a dealer for the SX50 you weren't smart enough to know that the MSRP of it wasn't $4k) again in detail for all to see if you want.

--Darin

Rick, now don't start with that HD DVD thing. I'm trying to resist buying until they sort out the format thing and you've not helping here! :D

Rick, now don't start with that HD DVD thing. I'm trying to resist buying until they sort out the format thing...

Hi,

Might be a long wait. :(

Best Wishes,

Mitch

Well then, it will be a long wait before they get my money. I bought a Betamax one time. . .

:)

Well then, it will be a long wait before they get my money. I bought a Betamax one time. . .

:)


Me too - and after I already had VHS (Beta looked better). I still have it and it still works too - a Sony C9 front loader. :)

Gary

I will never apologize for pointing out when somebody is being dishonest and trying to mislead people. I'm sure it bugs you that you didn't get away with it when you tried to mislead people about the relative prices of the Ruby and the SX50
--Darin

Talk about being stuck and misleading... I succumb to you oh master of misdirection, bashing and of a faulty memory.

It is you and your inability to swallow the fact that owning any more expensive piece of technology like the Ruby is going to cost way more per day to own and use it. Darin you might be good with CR ratios and IRE's (except for human color perception) but you sure appear to be flailing around in the dark (cave) when it comes to depreciation and market values of used equipment.

It is pointless to discuss this further but when a year is up and/or Sony ships a successor to the Ruby or a lower priced comparable model, then we'll review those alleged incorrect (or "lying") assumptions of mine that apparently are still eating away at you. We'll see how much you'll be able to get for your used Ruby then and what the market value is for two year old Qualias and one or 1.5 year old Ruby's.

But the fact of life in technology value remains - more expensive, higher end, cutting edge, fast changing technology products loose more value at a faster rate than lower end and mid-priced products of the same type. That is all my assumptions in price were meant to show and you siezed on my numbers as gospel and have been choking on them ever since but you will pay the piper when you move on from your Ruby to your next projector of passion. If you poll the folks here I am sure most will recognize the common sense of this discussion about technology values and depreciation and not be stuck as you have become of the rough numbers I used as estimates to make such a point. And it is you who still continue to distort this into me misleading folks all because you don't like that. I call that blatant bashing of the ongoing kind. But don't apologize for your ongoing distorting and twisting things that you don't want to hear. That would be out of character for the master basher here.

Back to the issue of color perception - how about doing something relevant for a change instead of all that flim-flam on CR? We all like "darker" blacks so move on. Why don't you show us some calculations on what a mere candle or two or three, etc does in your dark cave style HT and its effective CR's compared to the same on a system using higher lumen Canon class units and more specifically - at different lumen levels show how those changes in ambient light and CR affect the perception of color in the human eye (and not on some photometer). This is loosely worded but screen size, screen type & color, lumen/lambert levels, ambient light values, projector CR & lumens & color capability are among some of the variables that need to be pulled together in an investigation on what our eyers are actually perceiving in our real world Home Theaters. A mere focus on CR as some like to do is one small factor indeed in the bigger story here.

Certainly an image's CR and color on a higher reflectivity screen like the type needed to make a "dim" Ruby "bright" at ten feet diagonal are also going to be more impacted by minimal amounts of ambient light and as lumen levels fade as projector bulbs deteriorate over time. Perhaps a project on color perception capability of the human eye on a moving image on various screen types at various lambert levels in rooms of various ambient light levels (starting a zero value as in a cave) etc is beyond the scope of your capabilities like depreciation concepts.

Icon Master

I'm not quoting myself again. You know, the post where I clearly explain I don't currently have a projector because I sold all my theater gear last year. The post where I explain what projectors I previously owned and the screen size I used.
.


Thirdkind -

Apparantly I missed your post about selling your system and I apologize for that. The way you spoke in an earlier post about leaving your HT to go upstairs to watch SD programming on TV sets had a sense of the present tense to it and that is what stuck with me.

Perhaps I need to turn the lumens down on my Canon so my eyes won't be so bleary when I read this web site.

Icon Master

Wow.... watched a movie using the Toshiba HD DVD via the D2 through the SX60 and the picutre was absolutloey incredibly clear. For the first time I could aprreciate the over used saying that you can feel as thouhg the people in the picture are in your room.

Richkorn - I did the same this weekend. I watched the HD DVD version of Apollo 13 HD and it was phenomenal. Am using the HDMI/HDCP connection - not component. Even though the SX60 is native 720p, I found that the 1080i output was noticeably sharper. That bodes well for the SX60 handling 1080p if it does?

Or perhaps it is the Toshiba HD DVD player (the cheap one from Walmart) that does a better job with 1080i? Regardless, it looks fabulous and the DTS audio seems far more dynamic that dolby even through my five year old B&K receiver. I will run some 720p/1080i tests via DVI from the Oppo to see what that shows.

A fellow HT enthusiast stopped by to see the SX60. He is a RPTV fan and is waiting for the new DILA/LCOS based JVC 70" RPTV to ship this month - maybe? He has seen most of my projectors including my LCD Sanyo/Proxima, my Sony LCD, my Mitsubishi DLP, by Canon SX50 and now my SX60. His comment was that this was the first projector that truly impressed him. He cannot use a projector in his setup which cannot be darkened during the day and he like to watch the NFL on Sunday aftenoons. Dark caves will not work in his setup - hence RPTV.

Icon Master

Rick, now don't start with that HD DVD thing. I'm trying to resist buying until they sort out the format thing and you've not helping here! :D

I could be wrong but did I hear that Universal Studios said the will "never" go to Blue Ray? I hate this dual standard stuff too and recall waiting and waiting and waiting till VHS was the clear winner before putting down my hard earned $800 for a big, heavy RCA VHS deck I bought wholesale from the local distributor. I also remember giving it away to a buddy who used it two more years till it broke but I had moved on to a better VHS deck.

Along comes DVD and the first hot one out of the gate was allegedly a Toshiba 9000 something. I plunked down my $900 or so for that one. Within six months there was something a bit better but I held oot for a while. Now I've been through five or six DVD players and a couple of DVD-r's too. As the years get shorter as age increases I am less inclined to deprive myself while waiting for things like the format wars to get settled. I may not live to see them "settled" and before that happens there may even be crystal based players that may hold the library of congress and every movie ever made all in the space of an iPod sized crystal. No doubt Steve Jobs is working on something like that.

Meanwhile, within my budget constraints and using my midrange approach to high tech "toy" purchases, I will stay as close to the cutting edge as I can afford. I cannot buy $5K DVD players that aren't truly any better than the $200 Oppo. I cannot afford $10K Rubys and $30K Qualias that might just ba a tad better than the $3K to $5K (rough numbers Darin) Canon LCOS projectors. But by taking that slight step back from the high end (meaning more expensive) cutting edge approach I can afford to purchase an HDD DVD player for $500 and a Blue Ray unit too for $1000. If I had $30K or even $10K invested in my projector, I would not be able to keep up in this "game." That is my approach to this hobby. There are a few folks here that have unlimited budgets and they can stay on the top/front side of the cutting edge and buy ever high end new "thing" that comes out. Congrats and more power to them. Those are the guys with the big tax cuts and they are good for the economy - or so we have been told.

My budget is finite - not infinite - and that is why I take the moderate, middle ground approach. Do what works for you (and your budget) but if you are one of the older folks here, I am not so sure if waiting for standards to emerge should be in your game plan. If your gender is male, your wife may live to see that hidef dvd standard thing happen but us older guys might not live that long.

Icon Master

It is pointless to discuss this further but when a year is up and/or Sony ships a successor to the Ruby or a lower priced comparable model, then we'll review those alleged incorrect (or "lying") assumptions of mine that apparently are still eating away at you.I don't have to wait a year or any amount of time. You are a dealer for the SX50. Therefore, unless you are extremely stupid you know the MSRP. Yet you used $4k for it (the street and not the MSRP) while using MSRP for the Ruby and then when you got called on it one of your excuses was:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7198861&&#post7198861
I lead off with "For the sake of discussion"... "the beginning values used were the stated retail prices" This site doesn't want us to use or quote street prices.So, which is it Icon Master, did you know the $4k you used for the original price of the SX50 for the comparison wasn't MSRP? Are you going to try to convince people that despite being a dealer for it you didn't know?

Other people saw through this trick after I pointed it out, you claimed I couldn't do math and yet time proved me right and you had to change your numbers used to have any credibility at all. I still find the following to be one of the funnier things here given that I was proven right on the numbers and Icon Master had to change them:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7149057&&#post7149057
For an alleged techie type, I find your understanding of the fifth grade math I used disappointing. (You actually sounded like a liberal arts major in your respnose and not a tech). You are now demoted to remedial math till you review my numbers and prior posts and send me an apology.If you want to stand by what you said there and continue to claim that I am the one who was wrong there as you just did, then answer a simple question. Was your first math correct, and if so, why did you change it after I pointed out that it was faulty and end up with only 50% of your original claim?

People may notice that in the same post you claimed:
Again you pop in/off and have not been paying attention. I actually quoted the higher conservative number values on the worth of the SXRD "used" units in my calculations.despite the fact that you had used $2k for the value of a year old Ruby. Anybody here naive enough to buy into that $2k was either correct or even "the higher conservative number value"?

I can see why you wouldn't want to discuss it further as the history shows you to be wrong and somebody who will come up with whatever excuse they can to keep from admitting that while making false claims in reverse, when the history is right there to show what you did.

Some of the history is here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7144923&&#post7144923
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7195996&&#post7195996

And if you want to do an experiment, have your wife who you claim is great at judging colors look at the images from the SX60 in the higher contrast mode with no lights on or coming into the room and look at the same images in the brighter mode with whatever lighting you normally have, then have her report on which one has better colors. If you truely cared about colors as much as you are trying to put forth I think you would do something about your other lighting instead of continuing to have it and claiming it is real world. That is like claiming you care about the quality of food and then going to McDonalds and saying that it is real world because that's where most people eat. You can do what is easy (don't control your lighting), but quit acting like that makes you more discerning and not less discerning.

--Darin

If this was even generally how you phrased your logic, Icon, you might not get many arguments:

But the fact of life in technology value remains - more expensive, higher end, cutting edge, fast changing technology products loose more value at a faster rate than lower end and mid-priced products of the same type. That is all my assumptions in price were meant to show and you siezed on my numbers as gospel and have been choking on them ever since but you will pay the piper when you move on from your Ruby to your next projector of passion. If you poll the folks here I am sure most will recognize the common sense of this discussion about technology values and depreciation and not be stuck as you have become of the rough numbers I used as estimates to make such a point. And it is you who still continue to distort this into me misleading folks all because you don't like that. I call that blatant bashing of the ongoing kind. But don't apologize for your ongoing distorting and twisting things that you don't want to hear. That would be out of character for the master basher here.

Using that logic, though, wouldnt it be better to just buy a $1400 AE900 or a Sanyo Z4 that comes with an extra bulb and 92" screen?

I think the logical response to that would be that you get what you pay for when you go from the those projectors to the SX60, LCOS, more lumens, better optics, etc.

I dont think anyone would argue with that logic, either .. if it indeed was true .. which I am not saying it is or isnt .. but it at least is logical. (Personally I would rather have the AE900 or the Z4 .. but that is just me.)

Here is the big leap for you ... You should at least see the logic when people like Darin, and all the other people who made the Sony Ruby the top selling projector in the above $3500 price range, when they prefer to spend a little more money on the Ruby for better (than the SX60) optics, better contrast ratio, better blacks, 16:9, 1080p resolution, and enough brightness that some even have to use ND filters to dumb the brightness down. ( I know personally you would prefer to have the SX60, and I accept that just as you have to accept that if I was going to go for cheap .. I would not go for the SX60 since the AE 900 or the Z4 are much cheaper than the SX60 and are likely not too far off in picture quality from the SX60 (and much closer to it than the SX60 is to the Ruby.))

The only two things that the SX60 probably does better than the Ruby are price and brightness( and the brightness is a non-issue in the light controlled rooms that Ruby owners likely tend to have.)

I dont see either of you (Darin/Icon) as intentionally trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. I just see you (Icon) argue with emotion (some facts here and there .. and a lot of slight exagerration and some fantasy) and Darin argue with cold hard facts.

I think you have just tweaked Darin enough with your baits that he isnt seeing the comments and reviews in your posts with a grain of salt but is rather taking them as factual assertions which I personally dont interpret them to be.

The comment was made before, on another one of your threads, that you reminded some of the Iraqi Minister of (mis)Information who while Iraq was being invaded quickly by US forces got on TV to tell all of the world how the Iraqi forces were winning the war.

I personally liked to watch him on TV for entertainment value (as I laughed my ass off), but not for the news on what was happening in Iraq. 8)

While, unlike the Iraqi Minister, you do carry a host of good information in some of your posts you do have your (mis)Information moments and the trick is in knowing to just laugh at those, rather than to take them seriously.

Personally, I was hoping to see you post in some of mbrian's threads in the VP forums.

Using that logic, though, wouldnt it be better to just buy a $1400 AE900 or a Sanyo Z4 that comes with an extra bulb and 92" screen?I believe others pointed things like this out and it didn't do any good. I don't think anybody has argued that there aren't different depreciation levels for different projectors, but Icon Master must feel the need to use some kind of misdirection since I pointed out that his numbers were misleading and he had to change them. So maybe he feels that he must make a point that doesn't disagree with a single thing I have said and do it in a way that makes it sound like it does disagree with my position. The Ruby will generally have a higher cost per hour than much cheaper projectors. Nobody has disagreed with that, but that does not excuse trying to mislead people about how much those relative costs are.
You should at least see the logic when people like Darin, and all the other people who made the Sony Ruby the top selling projector in the above $3500 price range, when they prefer to spend a little more money on the Ruby for better (than the SX60) optics, better contrast ratio, better blacks, 16:9, 1080p resolution, and enough brightness that some even have to use ND filters to dumb the brightness down. ( I know personally you would prefer to have the SX60, and I accept that just as you have to accept that if I was going to go for cheap .. I would not go for the SX60 since the AE 900 or the Z4 are much cheaper than the SX60 and are likely not too far off in picture quality from the SX60 (and much closer to it than the SX60 is to the Ruby.))Please keep in mind that the SX60 is just coming out or has just come out. The discussions were about the SX50. The SX60 looks like it could be very nice to me, but I haven't seen one at this point.

I do not like people who try to trick others and a dealer using 20% lower than MSRP for one projector in a comparison and then claiming that the reason he used MSRP for the other projector in the comparison (which he was attempting to make look worse) is because street prices aren't supposed to be used, isn't just somebody being biased. I think it is somebody being dishonest for a purpose (and then not owning up to it, claiming others were the ones that were wrong, etc.). I don't like used car salesman tactics.

Anybody remember the guy from Maxx? About in the same category IMO.

--Darin

I do not like people who try to trick others and a dealer using 20% lower than MSRP for one projector in a comparison and then claiming that the reason he used MSRP for the other projector in the comparison (which he was attempting to make look worse) is because street prices aren't supposed to be used, isn't just somebody being biased. I think it is somebody being dishonest for a purpose (and then not owning up to it, claiming others were the ones that were wrong, etc.). I don't like used car salesman tactics.
--Darin

Darin you are stuck and I am fed up with you calling me dishonest. You keep forgetting that I used ESTIMATES based on the prices posted in the forum here at that time. You also keep forgetting that at the beginning the Ruby was not being discounted nor were their street prices initially being posted here because it is against the rules of the forum to do so - especially since the AVS folks sell Rubys. Since I am a dealer myself I try my best to avoid stepping on the toes of the AVS folks who run this great resource for my HT hobby. I did eventually put in a rough street price for the Ruby when one was posted here by someone else which allowed me to not be the member to break the rules here. Its $1K or so discount had a minimal affect on the cost of owning/running the Ruby. If you are still choking on the higher cost of running a Ruby or a Qualia, that is your problem. Don't keep trying to tell folks I lied when I was talking nominal numbers and estimates to make the point that a lot of other folks here apparently understand but it appears to escape you and hence you keep calling me names and lumping me in with some used car sales guy that must have taken advantage of you at some point in your life. (Go vent your frustartons at him kid - not me!)

If I did this alleged lying as you call it for personal gain, kindly show me and others here where I have made a profit on my depreciation discussion. Quite frankly you can not because I have not profitted on any of my discussions here - EVER! Thus it is time for you to shut your lying mouth spewing false accusations about me.

HT is not my business. Its my hobby. Hence your argument is baseless and your comments are slanderous. I run a reputable computer consulting firm and am one of the top Mac consultants in my area. I am darn good at advising artists, musicians and folks who don't understand business principles (much like yourself), and showing them the options they have for various Mac and related computer equipment and how much these items will cost them to own and operate. How dare you tell me I don't know what I am talking about when it is clear you are a super techie with little business experience. I have run several multimillion dollar firms. How about you? And my reputation is impeccable as is my credit with key manufacturers and distributors including Sony.

Redundantly, I am not interested in any business from the folks here so your comments are baseless. I tried to show folks here the general principals of equipment ownership costs and you have tried to turn this around and make it into something else beause you didn't want to hear it. Do you always attack the messenger if he bares news you don't want to hear - apparantly so!

As you said. "You don't like people who try to trick people." Well you made up your mind that I had some ulterior motive and once you did I can see you become unflappable. You do not know me and I don't know you but I do know that after you made that decision you did not let go. Well Darin, you are wrong. I don't care if you didn't/don't like my numbers. They were all guestimates based on what I had to work with at the time and as I said, it will be a year or so till the real numbers come in. Let it go kid.

As to the point brought up about buying a way cheaper unit because it costs even less to run, well of course that is true. I said that myself but I also implied that it is up to each person to decide how close to the cutting edge they want to be. The closer you are to the edge, the more costly it is to go and stay there as I demonstrated in the estimated costs I came up with to own and run the Qualia and the Ruby. The SX60 and SX50 will cost less due to their lower initial cost, the cost of its bulb, and the estimated life of the bulb. It is also true that those $1K to $2K projectors will cost even less to run.

For now though, among the LCOS based units, the Canon units are pretty close to the SXRD Sony's and the JVC's at rightly half (or less) the cost. No they aren't 1080p and they dont have dynamic Irises but their image qualty still competes. How well is in the eye of the beholder. If you read the Canon threads objectively you will see a bunch of happy Canon owners. My argument remains they got a lot of bang for the bucks they spent and they have money left over to buy other nice "toys."

Icon Master

And if you want to do an experiment, have your wife who you claim is great at judging colors look at the images from the SX60 in the higher contrast mode with no lights on or coming into the room and look at the same images in the brighter mode with whatever lighting you normally have, then have her report on which one has better colors. If you truely cared about colors as much as you are trying to put forth I think you would do something about your other lighting instead of continuing to have it and claiming it is real world.

That is like claiming you care about the quality of food and then going to McDonalds and saying that it is real world because that's where most people eat. You can do what is easy (don't control your lighting), but quit acting like that makes you more discerning and not less discerning.
--Darin

I did try an experiment with my wife. I think I did mention it here but I will repeat what I think I said. I had the SX60 in Cinema mode while our room was totally dark. I switched to sRGB mode and my wife said it was too bright. I agree that once you adjust to the lower light, lower lumen levels of Cinema mode you can possibly stay there but you have to be able to stay in literally total darkness. From all viewing situations for most folks that is not pricatical. That is the cool thing about the SX60. Yo can shift gears. wiht some ambient light in the room, sRGB is good even with the less dark blacks. This is all subjective. I would also bet that if I had not started the movie in Cinema mode, but sRGB, then my wife wouldn't have said I word.

I have been going back and forth between the two modes. I still cannot get the calibration right since I do not have the hardware to do s . I only have that Digital Essentials DVD wit the three color filters. Without calibration and with controlled, MR16 spot downlights on but dimmed way down, I still tend to prefer sRGB over Cinema mode. You may prefer Cinema mode in the same circumstances. My screen it a Studiotek 130 and I think that 500 or so lumen (guesstimate) is too dim fo the picture size I prefer.

At night I do have excellent control over the ligth in my HT room. All light in the room and adjacent rooms have dimmers on them so don;lt assume I don't take that into consideration. But I will agree that my eyes aren't the sharp 20-20's they were when I was twenty something.

On the food anology Darin - this is New Orleans. Folks here are more discerning about food (myself included) than probably any other place in the USA if not in the entire world. Post Katrina, I do not think any open dealer here carries SXRD Sony projectors or Runco but that doesn't mean that we New Orleanians don't enjoy our great food here. Excluding the fast food places here, even the "dives" here will produce food better than the top restaurants in most cities. To heck with CR or Lumens - we live for food here and our restaurants don't disappoint even in tho post Katrina topsy-turvy world.

Come on down, bring along a Ruby and lets test those units out. I'll even let you calibrate my SX60 for me. :) Then we can post objecitve instead of subjective reports on the comparison.

Icon Master

Its $1K or so discount had a minimal affect on the cost of owning/running the Ruby.That wasn't the only change you had to make and I will let people decide for themselves based on pure facts:

Icon Masters claim for the Ruby vs the SX50 was:
"$16.43 more per movie than I".
After I pointed out how people can be tricked by somebody using different criteria for two items in a comparison and Icon Master posted:
Darin - Again you pop in/off and have not been paying attention. I actually quoted the higher conservative number values on the worth of the SXRD "used" units in my calculations. They will probably be worth less. Also the SX50 sells for less than the $4K I used. For an alleged techie type, I find your understanding of the fifth grade math I used disappointing. (You actually sounded like a liberal arts major in your respnose and not a tech). You are now demoted to remedial math till you review my numbers and prior posts and send me an apology.
and
But since you are so poor in your understanding of math, even if the Q or Ruby are discounted say 10%, the $15 to $50 per day figures would barely budge with that factored in.
and
My simple math/depreciation calculations were questioned, etc.
he finally changed his numbers, basically addressing exactly what I had pointed out. But notice how Icon Master even to this day has not taken responsibility for his original numbers, but instead has tried to claim that I am the one who doesn't understand math. So, let's look at how his numbers worked out after he addressed the things I said originally (and which he clamed meant I was the one who didn't understand):
$8.21 more per movie per day that the SX50.
That's right. He went from $16.43 to $8.21 after expecting me to send him an apology for questioning the $16.43. It is all there in the history and everything I said was correct and even supported by him having to change his numbers to half. So, claims like the first one I quoted above can be used to try to make people believe that he didn't have to change his numbers much to have any credibility, but the fact is that the final number for the Ruby vs the SX50 cut his original claim in half. Put another way, he had found a way originally to claim twice as much as the value with much credibility.

And that isn't even counting that one of Icon Master's first excuses was that we aren't supposed to use street prices here and yet he obviously knew that the price he used for the SX50 wasn't the MSRP.

About his claims above about understanding business and I don't, I think people can see who had to change their numbers. Why would somebody really good at business have to cut their claim in half based on input from somebody they claim doesn't understand 5th grade math and who they say clearly has little business experience? That must be embarrassing.

--Darin

I have been lurking on this forum for the last 2 years preparing for the day that I could make my first post to offer constructive information about the equipment that I finally had chosen and was using. I have been following the discussions on the sx50 and sx60 with great interest.

That said... I am completely fed up with you guys baiting and retaliating. I would suggest you start your own thread entitled "Child like bickering" so that I can "choose" to follow along with your little drama rather than having it constantly sprung on me while trying to learn about the sx60. I am sure that this is just wasted typing as it has become obvious that you require an audience and it would not nearly be as fun if you only had each other to listen to.

If you are wondering if I am talking about the "other guy" you are correct. If you have wondered for even a fraction of a second if I am talking about "you" then you are also correct. Grow up!

My first post... what a waste :mad:

Darin,

I'll have to agree with sdebates.

It's tedious and not worth your time; and besides, anyone with half a brain will notice the rain of sparks from the axe he's grinding.

Respectfully, I also agree with the above. Obviously, if a projector costs more and the lamp costs more, it is going to cost more per hour to use. So what? The cost of the projector and replacement lamp is no secret going in. People will decide based on what they can afford, how well the projector fits their viewing pattern and likes/dislikes.

These are expensive toys regardless. How expensive they are per movie seems to me to be a rather pointless discussion.

I'd like to see more reviews and comments on the SX60 here if possible. Icon started this thread off with a helpful review, can we get back on topic please? Thanks! :)

Another vote to keep on topic.

So who has actually seen/tested one of these new boxes?
-Matt

Well Darin is at Infocomm, so maybe he can give his impressions of the new Canons. Of course if Icon is there, then maybe they can sell boxing tickets.:)

Ericglo

Yeah Darin, Head over to the Canon booth and give the SX60 a look.

I'm interested in how it compares to the SX50 if you've seen one.

I'm sure the blacks and CR aren't going to tempt you, but I'd like to hear your take nonetheless.

Thanks,
Ken

Darin,

While you are checking on the SX60 .. please check out the HD81, too. Can you see if both are capable of doing vertical stretch?

I just talked to him and he said the demos weren't that great. I will let him elaborate though. We do have a surprise for the CRT guys. I hope there isn't a mass suicide.:)

Ericglo

Would that be a mass suicide of CRT or fixed pixel owners? I'm doubting it could b classed as 'mass' suicide for CRT owners since there aren't many of them left these days (compared to FPD owners that is) :)

Intriguing none the less so 'fess up and tell!

Gary

Gary,
I will elaborate in a dedicated thread, but Digital Darin had the interest and desire to take a tour of VDC. He and I met Scott(tse) for a quick visit and dinner. Darin has now done something that only two other people (myself and Mike Parker) have done. None of the so-called CRT afficionados have had any desire to go and see a CRT factory.

Back on topic, I went to the Canon booth and found the SX60 to be an impressive pj. The source that they were using (Discovery HD) sucked. They had some proprietary images on the other pjs that looked really good. I found the Canon people to be nice and open to feedback. This should help in the two biggest improvements that are needed, which are on/off contrast and resolution. Since Canon only sources the LCOS chips from JVC and everything else is made by them, I should have asked if they could go with another manufacturers chips. Anyway, for the price this is a good option to look at.

Ericglo

Do post a pointer to the thread here if you start it, I'd hate to miss out. :)

Thanks.

Gary

Thanks for setting up the stuff with VDC Eric. I enjoyed that.
Yeah Darin, Head over to the Canon booth and give the SX60 a look.

I'm interested in how it compares to the SX50 if you've seen one.

I'm sure the blacks and CR aren't going to tempt you, but I'd like to hear your take nonetheless.The environment wasn't the best for judging projectors and there is no way to know what exact settings they are using, but I did take a look (and listen). I was surprised at how loud the SX50 is. You probably know that, but I just didn't realize it. It sounds like a business projector to me, where the SX60 sounds like a home theater projector. The SX60 is bigger and has two fans on the left side (looking from the back) instead of one high speed fan.

As far as the images, they were playing different things. The SX50 had static slides, where some had bars on the sides. I was surprised at how bright the bars were even though I didn't expect real good CR. I figured maybe it was the light leaking in, but when I put my hand just in front of the projector where a bar was I found that the shadow was very distinct and it definitely looked to me like the projector was the one providing most of the light to those areas of the screen (and not the light leaking in). Without knowing how the Brightness was set or how those bars were encoded in the sources I can't know if I was really seeing the best the projector could do in those areas though.

I like the idea of the dual modes with the SX60, although there was no way for them to change the modes because of a Crestron demonstration they were doing that wasn't totally functional and disabled the buttons on the projector. I'm hoping to get a better look at an SX60 and be able to measure light output and CR in each mode. They couldn't remember whether the light output was 1500 lumens or 1000 lumens in movie mode, but if 1000 lumens that would mean 750 into the 16:9 area (assuming no anamorphic lens), or about in the range of the Ruby at the short end of the throw and new bulb with the iris set to off or auto.

I didn't look at them back and forth real quick, but Eric mentioned that the SX50 looked brighter as they were setup.

Just a gut feeling at this point, but if I had the SX50 I would be pretty tempted to upgrade. I still want to check out the dual mode thing as I'm not clear how what they did would get them close to 2000:1 on/off CR though. I don't know what people could get for their used SX50s, but somebody told me that one sold on ebay for $1700 recently.

I asked about internal stretching for anamorphic lens support and they said it didn't support that. I also told them about the issues with the Toshiba HD DVD player messing up the colors to DVI inputs with HD and we discussed how a Lumagen scaler could fix that up and also allow the stretching for use with an anamorphic lens.

--Darin

Did you ask if Canon would offer a 1080p projector by Cedia even more tuned towards home theater?

Review is finally out:

http://www.projectorreviews.com/Manufacturers/canon/SX60/index.asp

Marcel J. Dumeny

Just read the review; yikes - 75% lumen sacrifice in the cinema mode, making it run-of-the-mill compared to much cheaper competition for a 16:9 HT pj.

Just read the review; yikes - 75% lumen sacrifice in the cinema mode, making it run-of-the-mill compared to much cheaper competition for a 16:9 HT pj.It still has some lumens advantage for setups where people want to blast the projector to fight other lighting just some percentage of the time, but 400 lumens in home cinema mode with the lamp on low (which is 300 lumens for the 16:9 portion) is much lower than many of us expected. After Infocomm I was expecting closer to the light output of the Ruby when the SX60 was in home cinema mode. After having the Sharp 11k that could go high contrast or high lumens (maybe 700 in that case) I did find that it was nice to have the option to go brighter at times. But the dimmer mode needs to be bright enough to be useful in a setup for that flexibility to matter.

--Darin

After reading the somewhat lame review last night, I looked at the Canon brochure again. The two differences between the Sx6 and SX60 are lamp size (270 watt to 180 watt) and filters (Abode and Home Cinema). I think the filter solution isn't the best way for Canon to increase contrast. The filter may be a good solution for the end user. Thinking about it some more led me to a different belief regarding these pjs. If one is looking for brightness, then spend the couple of hundred dollars difference on the SX6 instead of the SX60. You can then use your own filter to dim it down for hopefully a better contrast ratio. The 6 starts with 3500 lumens as opposed to the 60's 2500 lumens. If you don't bow to the altar of lumens, then it may be better to wait for Cedia.

Ericglo

Also, what is up with the reviews? Where is the worthwhile reviews like Greg Rogers and Steve Smallcombes? I can figure out on my own that these things project an image.

Ericglo

"You can then use your own filter to dim it down for hopefully a better contrast ratio."

According to the review the cinema mode uses an iris, not a filter, which wouldn't increase CR.

"You can then use your own filter to dim it down for hopefully a better contrast ratio."

According to the review the cinema mode uses an iris, not a filter, which wouldn't increase CR.I'm not sure where the part about the iris came from as all I heard about at Infocomm was a filter in the path. I'm still not sure about the increased CR effect and would like to measure one.

--Darin

I assumed the filter that was mentioned would use a different calibration setting to account for the different color balance a color correcting filter would need. An iris makes more sense though.

Gary

"I'm not sure where the part about the iris came from"

I won't vouch for its accuracy, but on the first page of Art's review it says "...the SX60 has added a Home Cinema mode, and uses an iris to dramatically improve contrast in that new mode."

http://www.projectorreviews.com/Manufacturers/canon/SX60/index.asp

Sounds like a bit of a misunderstanding to be honest.

A review with measurements and numbers would be helpful.

"I'm not sure where the part about the iris came from"I should have been more clear. I'm not sure where Art got that information. He may have talked to different people than I did.

--Darin

Here is a pic of the brochure:
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/3568/guacustom2ea.th.jpg (http://img149.imageshack.us/my.php?image=guacustom2ea.jpg)

You can see the filter in the pic.

Ericglo

A green filter? I was assuming a red filter or maybe an fl-d as they' pretty common for colour correcting the extra green/blue/lack of red in UHP lamps, so how does green work (it cuts red and blue)? Or is it done with dichroic glass so we're see reflected light and not the effect of the light pasing through? Is it related to polarised light?

Gary

A green filter? I was assuming a red filter or maybe an fl-d as they' pretty common for colour correcting the extra green/blue/lack of red in UHP lamps, so how does green work (it cuts red and blue)? Or is it done with dichroic glass so we're see reflected light and not the effect of the light pasing through? Is it related to polarised light?I think the green is probably for the SX6, with a red or somewhat purple one there for the SX60. If you blow the image up it is easier to see that there are 2 filters with different colors (one for each model).

--Darin

Ah yes, I see the purple one now that you mention it. I was just looking at the blown up pic of the filter and not the assembly pic. Magenta absorbs green so that makes sense, though I'm still not sure how a green filter fits in.

Gary

I was surprised at how loud the SX50 is. You probably know that, but I just didn't realize it. It sounds like a business projector to me, where the SX60 sounds like a home theater projector. The SX60 is bigger and has two fans on the left side (looking from the back) instead of one high speed fan.

I didn't look at them back and forth real quick, but Eric mentioned that the SX50 looked brighter as they were setup.
--Darin

From the description it sounds like they had the SX50's lamp in normal mode and the SX60 set to Quiet mode. The SX50's fan is noticeable but especially so in normal mode. Most of us SX50 owners run their units in the Quiet mode which has a lower lumen output and also runs the cooling fans at a slower, lower db level. The SX60's fans are quiet in either mode but the lamp life is longer in Quiet mode.

FYI, there is a INFOCOM special running all this month on the Canon SX LCOS projectors which includes a free lamp with any one of the four models. Offer expires at the end of this month.

Icon Master

>FYI, there is a INFOCOM special running all this month on the Canon SX LCOS projectors which >includes a free lamp with any one of the four models. Offer expires at the end of this month.

Canon appears to be blowing it.

(1) From what I can figure out. There hasn't been any stock of SX60's for the last few weeks.
(2) The INFOCOM Special. Lovely as it is, hasn't been communicated very well. Moot point
if you don't have any stock to sell.

At this rate, by the time it becomes widely available, it will be fairly overpriced (for people who can also use DLP) if they maintain the present price structure.

At this rate, by the time it becomes widely available, it will be fairly overpriced (for people who can also use DLP) if they maintain the present price structure.

Canon has not been one to sit back and get priced out of the market on any of their products lines whether it is cameras or copy machines. Considering that the SX60 is on a par with the "Ruby" at half the price with more versatility (as in higher lumen capablity for viewing with some lights on) then at its $5K price, the SX60 appears to be very competitive in the LCOS realm.

You can't let the Ruby fans boasting fool you. They'd give their first born for about 500 more lumens. :)

The 1080p DLP units appear to be coming in at $10K or more. Perhaps Sony will have a high lumen 720p based SXRD unit to push the Canon down in price but for now the SX60 as shown in the review referred to above is in a price and picture quality and lumen and versatility class by itself.

Icon Master

A rather thorough review of the SX60 can be found at ProjectorCentral.com -
http://www.projectorcentral.com/canon_sx60.htm

Check out the 16:9 and 4:3 images he posted. The reviewer was a "wee bit" impressed by the SX60.

A couple of quotes from the Projector Central review follow -

"The Canon SX60 is a breed apart, a unique animal designed to produce excellent results with both 4:3 and 16:9, so it is built for people who care about both formats equally"

"...for me personally, the Canon SX60 is the closest thing to a perfect home theater projector that I have yet seen under $5,000."

The reviewer like myself tends not to like the lower lumen output of the SX60's Cinema mode since he felt the CR improvement was not worth the sacrifice in lumens.

He measured the lumens in uncalibrated mode at 1788. Calibrated the lumens he measured were 443/383 (standard/econo lamp) in Cinema mode and 790/893 in one of the non-Cinema "standard" modes. The $550 lamp is rated at 3000/4000 hours (depending on lamp mode).

For the SX50 owners, the reviewer found the SX60 far sharper optically and way more noise free than the SX50 through the DVI digital port.

Enjoy the review folks. Canon in a very short time is making its presence felt in the forward projection market and no doubt there will be more to follow. Redundantly - remember what Canon did in and to the digital camera field. They own the high end and much of the consumer and prosumer too. Nikon doesn't know what hit them still. Watch out Sony!!

Icon Master

A rather thorough review of the SX60 can be found at ProjectorCentral.com -
http://www.projectorcentral.com/canon_sx60.htm

Enjoy the review folks.

Icon Master
They usually have the least valuable reviews on the net. Hopefully, there will be something of interest. I still say that a SX6 would be better if you want lumens.

Ericglo

remember what Canon did in and to the digital camera field. They own the high end and much of the consumer and prosumer too. Nikon doesn't know what hit them still. Watch out Sony!!

Icon Master

I wish I had an SX-60 for everytime you've played the Canon digital camera card ... :D :D :D

Canon didn't get to the top in digicams releasing 1.3MP versions of the competitors 7MP cameras.

Where's the leading edge, 16:9 1080p option?

Note the word OPTION ... 4:3 vs 16:9 is personal preference, but if Canon were being truly competitive here, they would be offering a flavor of what consumers are buying most of.

A rather thorough review of the SX60 can be found at ProjectorCentral.com -He measured the lumens in uncalibrated mode at 1788. Calibrated the lumens he measured were 443/383 (standard/econo lamp) in Cinema mode and 790/893 in one of the non-Cinema "standard" modes.790/893 would put it at about 593/679 for the 16:9 portion of the image. The low lamp one is pretty close to what the Ruby puts out with a new lamp and at the short end of the throw. Even after color calibration I believe the Ruby is pretty close to that. The Ruby doesn't have different lamp modes like the Canon, I don't know how many hours he had the Canon lamp for those measurements and the Ruby probably dims faster than the Canon as hours are put on the lamp, but from those measurements it looks like a user would have to use it with messed up colors compared to the standards for video in order to have it be way brighter than the Ruby for 16:9 (without an anamorphic lens) and 2.35:1 material. Are you using your Canon in a mode that is uncalibrated by standards for the material we get, or is your's calibrated to D65, etc.?

--Darin

Are you using your Canon in a mode that is uncalibrated by standards for the material we get, or is your's calibrated to D65, etc.?
--Darin

According to Canon Tech support the sRGB mode is the closest to 6500K out of the box. I tried using the Digital Essentials DVD to calibrate but those filters don't do it for me.

Is there reasonably affordable equipment I can purchase to calibrate the SX60 to my Oppo, Toshiba HD DVD and as a big reach to my satellite receivers? (Remember too I don't have a PC in the house being a Mac enthusiast.).

On the lamp fade issue, I can say that the SX50 showed little if any fade after six months of moderate use. The SX60 uses a different 180 watt bulb. The SX50 had a 250 watt lamp. The SX50's lamp has a 2000 hour rating and the SX60 has the 3000/4000 rating but how does that translate to output fading? Guess we'll need some hours on these to see what happens.

Has any of our SX50 users here had noticeable lam fade or even had to replace a lamp?

Icon Master

Canon has not been one to sit back and get priced out of the market on any of their products lines whether it is cameras or copy machines.
As I said, for viewers who like DLPs (or have no issues with 1 chip DLPs), the Canon is already way overpriced and has been largely outperformed in some critical areas. Mitsu's latest projector streets for $4K, has far more lumens when calibrated, double the CR, and a sharper/better lens. Canon is only superior in its reduced SDE and RBEs (neither is an issue for most viewers, but for those who are bothered by RBEs, 1 chip DLP is a non-starter, especially with a bright projector).

Has any of our SX50 users here had noticeable lam fade or even had to replace a lamp?
Considering its fan noise, I would be highly surprised if its an issue. I would also bet it is not an issue for the SX60 (since Canon is probably designing according to bulb cooling requirements as opposed to meeting some exaggerated silent mode).

As I said, for viewers who like DLPs (or have no issues with 1 chip DLPs), the Canon is already way overpriced and has been largely outperformed in some critical areas. Mitsu's latest projector streets for $4K, has far more lumens when calibrated, double the CR, and a sharper/better lens. Canon is only superior in its reduced SDE and RBEs (neither is an issue for most viewers, but for those who are bothered by RBEs, 1 chip DLP is a non-starter, especially with a bright projector).LCOS is going to have a different look that some people prefer even if not bothered by SDE or RBE. Part of that might be how much of an annoyance mosquito noise is, where I would guess the LCOS would be better. Is that Mitsu with a white segment on the colorwheel?

--Darin

If I remember correctly, they did not implement the white segment, but they did use BC (however, I think that can be "disengaged"). Good point about the look, but then again, that plays both ways, some people will prefer the "sharpness" of the DLP (thus my proviso for people who liked DLPs). However, I really do wonder how visible those artifacts will become with the new Mitsu, because it is extremely bright even when calibrated (with on/off CR ~ 2000)

As I said, for viewers who like DLPs (or have no issues with 1 chip DLPs), the Canon is already way overpriced and has been largely outperformed in some critical areas. Mitsu's latest projector streets for $4K, has far more lumens when calibrated, double the CR, and a sharper/better lens. Canon is only superior in its reduced SDE and RBEs (neither is an issue for most viewers, but for those who are bothered by RBEs, 1 chip DLP is a non-starter, especially with a bright projector).

Raul -

I have two projectors. One for every day run-of-the-mill viewing and the Canon SX60. Guess what brand and type of projector my every day unit is? It is a Mitsubishi DLP unit. It's about a year old now so it does not have the latest colorwheel/DarkChip3 or 2 Plus. At the time I bought the unit it was a one of the highly rated dual purpose DLP units out there.

Unless the DLPs have lept forward in the last year I find what you refer to as the Canon's "reduced" SDE a bit of an exaggeration on your part apparently not having seen either Canon LCOS unit. By comparison sitting back about 14 feet DLP's have a still very noticeable and annoying SDE. I can mentally block it out and pay attention to content but when I switch to the Canon it is like going from digital to film. There is NO as in NNNNOOOOO!!! SDE on either Canon visible beyond a few inches from the screen. The colors on the Canon or richer/deeper Than my DLP and it is like watching film and not a digital projector with a screen full of pixels with thin black borders.

So DLP enthusiasts have their blacker blacks but they have what I see in effect is a greyish net cast over the image in the form of a noticeable screen (door). From everything I have read coming out of the recent trade shows this SDE effect is not going to be much less if any less noticeable in the 1080p units and that will include the 3xDLP units too.

If Canon can truly get the CR up a bit more, keep the lumens up there with their next units then it will be the DLP folks looking to LCOS and not the other way around as you seem to suggest. I find the SDE of DLP to be far more detrimental to the image quality than the 1000:1 CR of the Canon LCOS units. But that of course is a personal observation having seen and lived with both types of units every day for a year now.

Icon Master

I wish I had an SX-60 for every time you've played the Canon digital camera card ... :D

Where's the leading edge, 16:9 1080p option?

Note the word OPTION ... 4:3 vs 16:9 is personal preference, but if Canon were being truly competitive here, they would be offering a flavor of what consumers are buying most of.

There is no "card" here. Get real!! Many of my clients are professional photographers. I am hard pressed to find a Nikon being used by any of them and I am one who has a draw full of old Nikon "analog" (film) cameras. Maybe a museum will want them someday along wiht my attic full of old Macs. :)

Where is the 1080p 16:9 Canon? I do not know but one may be coming. Consider that Canon for $9K has the best HiDef camcorder out there in that price range. (Sorry again Sony). It makes sense to believe they will marry it to a 16:9 projector someday but I have nothing concrete on that - only rumors and innuendos. For now I am very happy with my SX60 and am not looking to jump ship to a screen door laden, overpriced, low lumen 1080p DLP unit because it has blacker blacks along with its dimmer entire picture. I suppose with the higher 1080p resolution and lower lumens the screen door will fade into the dimmer picture and be less apparently seeable but screen door is screen door and it detracts from the picture quality and makes it look digital instead of film-like which is the quest of us home theater enthusiasts - is it not?

As to what the consumer are buying - I think most are buying bigger TV sets. Us forward projection folks are in a small Mac'ish class possibly 5% market share. Among this lot most are probably buying the cheapest $2000 or less units they can get their hands on in WalMart or Sam's Wholesale. We here in our self-righteous heated debates about LCOS versus DLP versus LCD versus 720P or 108p/i are less than one percent as in 1% of the whole TV/HT/HiDef market. But we are the most important segment - right? We are THE ONES who lead the way for others to follow - RIGHT? Of course right!

Icon Master

Bulb report -

500 hours and no noticeable bulb lumen fall-off. How soon are the Ruby folks seeing bulb degeneration - in a few days or weeks? I guess the 400 watt lamp the Ruby uses producing a net of around 600 or less lumens expends most of its energy destroying itself. I am actually having to turn down the brightness on my SX60's 180 watt lamp even in econo mode. Maybe I'll get 5000 hours of life instead of 4000 then?

Again I ask the questions. Have any SX50 owners here changed their first bulb yet? Have any seen lumen fall-off?

Icon Master

I've had my SX50 for about a half year now, original bulb, and it looks as bright as the day I got it. I even keep the bulb on high. I have a movie screen just over 12 feet long, the image is easily 12' or 144 inches at 16:9. With an image that big you would need the brighter setting, although I also enjoy a bright picture anyway. Absolutely no complaints with the SX50, it doesn't yet seem justifiable for me to get the SX60. When Canon makes a true HD projector in the SX series, or next gen series, whatever, that's when I'll make the move!

I've had my SX50 for about a half year now, original bulb, and it looks as bright as the day I got it. I even keep the bulb on high. I have a movie screen just over 12 feet long, the image is easily 12' or 144 inches at 16:9. With an image that big you would need the brighter setting, although I also enjoy a bright picture anyway. Absolutely no complaints with the SX50,...


Morritec -

That is very impressive!!! Have you looked at the bulb usage indicator screen? I think it is on the third (from the right) pull down menu about half way down. Does the indicator bar, which moves to the right with usage, show that the bulb is near end-of-life? If not, how far across is the indicator?

Icon Master

P.S. Morritec - What screen material do you have?

SX60 Initial Impressions:

(1) Arrived yesterday. Street Price is far less than MSRP.

(2) It's Bright! :-)

(3) Out of the box, this unit will require calibration on all inputs. It shows good potential.

(4) The unit has it's pros and cons. Bottom line it's just as capable as the JVC G20 I just retired.
I can easily live with this projector for the next 3 years until 1080 projectors mature.

More details next week. But, in the meantime, it's back to the World Cup.

There is no "card" here. Get real!! Many of my clients are professional photographers. I am hard pressed to find a Nikon being used by any of them and I am one who has a draw full of old Nikon "analog" (film) cameras. Maybe a museum will want them someday along wiht my attic full of old Macs. :)

Where is the 1080p 16:9 Canon? I do not know but one may be coming. Consider that Canon for $9K has the best HiDef camcorder out there in that price range. (Sorry again Sony). It makes sense to believe they will marry it to a 16:9 projector someday but I have nothing concrete on that - only rumors and innuendos. For now I am very happy with my SX60 and am not looking to jump ship to a screen door laden, overpriced, low lumen 1080p DLP unit because it has blacker blacks along with its dimmer entire picture. I suppose with the higher 1080p resolution and lower lumens the screen door will fade into the dimmer picture and be less apparently seeable but screen door is screen door and it detracts from the picture quality and makes it look digital instead of film-like which is the quest of us home theater enthusiasts - is it not?

As to what the consumer are buying - I think most are buying bigger TV sets. Us forward projection folks are in a small Mac'ish class possibly 5% market share. Among this lot most are probably buying the cheapest $2000 or less units they can get their hands on in WalMart or Sam's Wholesale. We here in our self-righteous heated debates about LCOS versus DLP versus LCD versus 720P or 108p/i are less than one percent as in 1% of the whole TV/HT/HiDef market. But we are the most important segment - right? We are THE ONES who lead the way for others to follow - RIGHT? Of course right!

Icon Master


JUST WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING? Amazing how you like to distort facts.


CHEERS, TC

I thought this was AV SCIENCE, not AV BS :)

t. glinos:

Curious why you purchased the SX60 if you already had a G20 - same technology, almost the same pixel count.

I have two G11s, and have been following the SX60 thread with interest - one of my viewing locations could use more lumens.

Will be interested in hearing your comparisons of picture quality, for standard definition and high definition.

Marcel J. Dumeny

I've been having problems with my G20 for a year. Probably power supply.
It isn't cost effective to repair. I blew my last bulb two months ago, so....

I've spent all evening working with my SX60. A few observations.

(1)Feeding it 1080 from the local OTA PBS station isn't as good as on the G20.
It's internal scaler and colours seem to be off. Pity stations don't transmit color bars.

(2)Feeding NTSC into the S-video port is a little odd as well.
The SX60 can't seem to reproduce teal. More investigation is needed.

(3)For yuks I hooked up my old laser disk player to the composite port
and fired up "A Video Standard". I EVENTUALLY got a good picture, but
the settings were FAR from zero points for both Home Theartre and Movie modes.

(4)I have yet to hook a computer.

Why the SX60 over anything else?

(1) I don't like colour wheels.
(2) I don't want a dim projector (no ruby)

Screen Door Laden 1080p Dlp???

JUST WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING? Amazing how you like to distort facts.

CHEERS, TC


The SDE effect on my Mitsubishi DLP projector is quite noticeable. I have seen many posts here confirming the same with literally all DLP units. The SDE of a DLP unit is especially noticeable when you switch between it and an LCOS unit like the Canon SX50 and SX60. This is no distortion of "facts" as you wold like to believe. If you are used to DLP then you are also used to its SDE but you are the one hiding your head in the sand if you think DLP is SDE free. What I can say factually too since I own a Sony LCD unit is that in general the SDE on DLP units is less than that of LCD although there are some new LCD units that are reversing that "fact" too.

I would like to know definitively is if the 1080p DLP units will have a less noticeable SDE than the 720p units. I have yet to see a serious discussion on that but from what little I have seen mentioned about the 1080p units shown at the trade shows the SDE is still there on the forthcoming 1080p DLP units. If you have some "facts" to add to this discussion instead of a baseless emotional attack response lets hear them.

TC - What are you smoking that makes you the "cheery" one? Some of my post was meant to be humorous but apparantly that went way, way over your "cheery" but not cleary head.

Icon Master

I've spent all evening working with my SX60. A few observations.

(1)Feeding it 1080 from the local OTA PBS station isn't as good as on the G20.
It's internal scaler and colours seem to be off. Pity stations don't transmit color bars.

(2)Feeding NTSC into the S-video port is a little odd as well.
The SX60 can't seem to reproduce teal. More investigation is needed.

(3)For yuks I hooked up my old laser disk player to the composite port
and fired up "A Video Standard". I EVENTUALLY got a good picture, but
the settings were FAR from zero points for both Home Theartre and Movie modes.


t.glinos -

I have never used the "S" video or RCA inputs on my SX50 or SX60. My standard video sources go through my DVR and then are feed via component into the SX60.

To get near 6500K according to Canon and the two SX60 reviews start with the sRGB setting and feed the signal in by DVI or component. Bumping up each of the R, G, and B values makes the picture even richer but that does depend on the programming source.

I have no calibration equipment and would like to hear the RGB adjustment numbers you come up with if you can do a "real" equipment based and not subjective eyeball calibration.

FYI, the new Toshiba HD DVD player (w/HDCP) works great with the SX60 even via a 30 foot long DVI/HDMI cable.

Icon Master

t.glinos -

I have never used the "S" video or RCA inputs on my SX50 or SX60. My standard video sources go through my DVR and then are feed via component into the SX60.

To get near 6500K according to Canon and the two SX60 reviews start with the sRGB setting and feed the signal in by DVI or component. Bumping up each of the R, G, and B values makes the picture even richer but that does depend on the programming source.

I have no calibration equipment and would like to hear the RGB adjustment numbers you come up with if you can do a "real" equipment based and not subjective eyeball calibration.

Icon Master

My G20 had all sorts of inputs. So my gear is a bit of a mis-mash.
Last night was just "getting to know" my projector and having a bit of fun.

Looks like the SX60 internal NTSC scaler sucks. Maybe. Could be cables.
Too early to tell. Do SX50 folks all use scalers?

I do have some basic calibration equipment that might work with this setup
so I can figure out brightness and colour temperatures. But, I won't be able to
experiment until Monday. Long weekend family functions

.....

Looks like the SX60 internal NTSC scaler sucks. Maybe. Could be cables.
Too early to tell. Do SX50 folks all use scalers?

...

I use a scaler with my SX50. Sweet spots are 720P, 1080i, and 1080p.

Although at the moment, for DVD, I'm using the Toshiba A1 HD-DVD player set to output 1080i. Great great player.

I use only the DVI input.

Awesome projector for everything except Space Battles.

Ken

I'm still processing my NTSC through an old Faroudja NRS, works great.

I've had my sx60 for three weeks now. I waited three years before deciding on this machine. I'm not 100% sure it was the best buy given my requirements and preferences. But I still don't know what could work better for me. I would by the Ruby if it would meet my requirements. Its not a money issue.

I'm not a cave man so the Ruby and many other/most projectors are to dim for me. I don't doubt that the Rubys image is better in dark conditions though. I'm sure some of the 1-chip DLPs have better images in caves as well. However I very rarely whatch movies in pitch black, almost always there is some ambient light. To a true freak that is of course unaccaptable, but that is the way I watch and I'm sure many others do the same.

My biggest concern with the sx60 was the 4:3 pannel. I'm only using the 16:9. Maybe I will go anamorphic to capture its full potential. However my biggest fear was that it would have a light halo (spill) outside the 16:9 pannel when in 16:9 mode. It has none. I don't know how they have done it but they have totally blocked all light outside the active pannel.

Another fear was noise (the main reason why I didn't buy the sx50) when not in silent mode. It turns out it is very silent even in normal mode. The sx60 is a lot more silent then my previous sony vw10 when it was in silent mode.

I'm not just watching movies. I use the PJ to watch regular TV, sports, surfing the net etc.

I've recently watched a lot of fotball world cup (thats the biggest thing there is in sports for us folks outside the US :) ) in 720p broadcasts. The image quality is stunning! As you know black level is not key here rather fantastic colours and the smooth LCOS image with absolutely no SDE is. I also watch HD material from a European satellite movie channel Canal + and the image is really really good. I swith beween 720p and 1080i and don't see much difference. The same is true when I feed the image from my dvd player Denon 1920 and swith between 720p and 1080i, not much of a difference.

I have not calibrated the machine yet. I use the default settings and have switched between the different image modes. I have mainly used the presentation mode. The Home Cinema mode is too dim for me. My current screen is gain 1.0 and I'm thinking about getting more of a high gain screen like the Silverstar or maybe the Danish new screen (forgot the name) so that I can use the Home Cinema mode when I get in the "cave mode" :) .

I think it is bad that they only equipped it with one digital input. I want to have at least my PC, Satellite and DVDplayer connected with HDMI, but I guess I have to buy the Denon AVR-4306 which has 3 HDMI inputs.

I like the features of power focus and zoom.

I will get back with more observations and maybe shoot outs with other PJs.

Yossy from Sweden

But, I won't be able to
experiment until Monday. Long weekend family functions

I've had my SX60 for a few days and I thought I'd put down
some observations. Canon did a lot right. The following is
a list of "issues" with my unit. They aren't bad enough
for me to return the unit. Background: The SX60 is a replacemnt
for my JVC G20. I expect to keep this projector for a couple of years.

(1) It would be REALLY nice to able to select an input with
ONE push of the remote button. Not much of a problem because...

(2) Out of the four inputs. Only the DVI and component inputs
are of any use. The internal scaler for S-video and composite
inputs could be much better. Interestingly enough, I'm watching
the shuttle liftoff over S-video input as I type. It's tolerable.
The World Cup is bad. HINT: The "bouncing" Snell and Wilcox
test pattern is awfull.

(3) When feeding an OTA 1030i ATSC into the component input
something weird is going on. The local PBS station traditionaly
has the best signal/picture. But on the SX60 the picture shows
artifacts and plastic colours. Interestingly enough other local
ATSC network signals look pretty good. Hmmm more processing?

(4) A lack of a monitor.inf for this projector is unfortunate.

(5) Zoom and focus adjustments from the remote are coarse.
It's tedious trying to find the sweet spot. I'm guessing they
are using DC motors instead of steppers.

(6) The projector should display the signal type, frequence, etc.
on demand.

(7) The blue and green panels aren't in sharp focus.
Drawing single pixel green or blue lines shows this problem.

(8) Drawing single pixel white spots on a black background
is very telling. There's significant coma at the corners of the field.

(9) I pulled out my old Progressive Labs CA-1 in the hopes
of using it to set the colour temperature. Didn't work too well.
I reverted to AVIA, A Video Standard and a Kodak Grey card.

Here's the good news. This projector has good ability
to set the colour temp. I eventually got a good image on the
NTSC and ATSC formats using suggested the sRGB mode. The bad news is...

(10) The "advanced" adjustment configurations are poorly documented.
The 'Dynamic Gamma' and 'Mem. color correct' could be usefull, but.....

Conclusion. The SX60 isn't perfect but for a $4k+ projector
is a pretty good deal. Except for the defects in the optical
path, all the other deficiencies could be corrected with an
external scaler and use of the DVI port.
Out of the box it makes a pretty good data projector.
I suspect that the unit has all sorts of hidden functions
available through the service/USB ports. It would be nice to
get documentation on them.

t.glinos,

I wonder if you shouldn't ask for a replacement pj. At $4k you shouldn't be putting up with unfocussed panels. My experience with HD sports matches Yossy22's. You should be thrilled.

On another note we watched Star Wars AOTC's last night upsampled by the Toshiba HD-DVD to 1080i over HDMI and it sure was a treat. I've never seen such detail and depth in that movie. The whole family was noticing things we never had.

Anyone who has this setup, pull out that disc and watch the chase scene right after the attempt on Padme's life.

Yossy22,

Thanks for the report. I've been wondering about the blue halo. Sounds like Canon has made what the SX50 should have been in the first place. I'd like to upgrade, but we're enjoying the SX50 so much I think I'll sit tight. Tempting though.

Ken

t.glinos,

I wonder if you shouldn't ask for a replacement pj. At $4k you shouldn't be putting up with unfocussed panels. My experience with HD sports matches Yossy22's. You should be thrilled.

Ken

I find the coma at the edge of the field more objectionable but, that
can only be repaired with a higher quality lens. These defects are NOT
detectable. My G20 had pixel offset problems due to it's analog inputs
that were much worse.

I'll try to take a few images to show the coma and focus issues.

Oh, yes. The SX60 does do some curious processing when displaying
1080i in either normal or wide mode on the component inputs. Can't remember
which right now. I eventually solved by quality problems by playing with my
ATSC and the SX60 until the processing artifacts went away. Stunning hidef pics.

The spousal supervisory unit gave her blessing.

I've been having problems with my G20 for a year. Probably power supply.
It isn't cost effective to repair. I blew my last bulb two months ago, so....


Did the bulb literally blow? How many hours and was there any peripheral damage?

Did the bulb literally blow? How many hours and was there any peripheral damage?

Someone once posted that Disney had plenty of G15's and G20's.
They would run them until the bulbs quit. That's what I did as well.
I usually got about 2500 hours that way. Bulbs from Atlas cost about $400.

These projectors generate a LOT of heat. So much so that the lamp housings
became brittle and started to crack. I repaired them with epoxy. But as
the projector aged, instead of the bulbs just silently dying, they made a mess.

The picture became very dim one day on a new bulb so I took it to JVC.
They said that the hole optical block needed replacing at a cost of $9k. No thanks.

The SDE effect on my Mitsubishi DLP projector is quite noticeable. I have seen many posts here confirming the same with literally all DLP units. The SDE of a DLP unit is especially noticeable when you switch between it and an LCOS unit like the Canon SX50 and SX60. This is no distortion of "facts" as you wold like to believe. If you are used to DLP then you are also used to its SDE but you are the one hiding your head in the sand if you think DLP is SDE free. What I can say factually too since I own a Sony LCD unit is that in general the SDE on DLP units is less than that of LCD although there are some new LCD units that are reversing that "fact" too.

I would like to know definitively is if the 1080p DLP units will have a less noticeable SDE than the 720p units. I have yet to see a serious discussion on that but from what little I have seen mentioned about the 1080p units shown at the trade shows the SDE is still there on the forthcoming 1080p DLP units. If you have some "facts" to add to this discussion instead of a baseless emotional attack response lets hear them.

TC - What are you smoking that makes you the "cheery" one? Some of my post was meant to be humorous but apparantly that went way, way over your "cheery" but not cleary head.

Icon Master

You used the phrase in the original post , that I was responding to, " SCREEN DOOR LADEN 1080P", as if it were a forgone fact, know by all man kind. That is what I was objectiong too, and how you indeed do like to distort facts/information, to suit your needs (agenda ?). The fact dear sir is that just about no one on this planet, save you, generally sees any screen door on 720 P DLP units aslong as there is a minimum of 1.5 to 1.6 seating distance (and for those that like to sit even closer, a simple, very slight defocus will remove SDE, and still leave one with a very sharp looking image). The leap that 1080 p units with almost twice the pixel count will have even more screen door, or at the very least, the same, is rather ridiculous.

CHEERS, TC
PS, By the by, I don't even like single chip DLP's any more, as I can't handle numerous issues with them, (however screen door isn't one of them).

Anyone else have a problem with little green specs?

I've had my sx60 for under a week and it's got at least 6 green specs scattered through the image. I'm not sure if they were there when I got it. They seem smaller than a pixel in size, so I'm not sure if they're just stuck pels. From a reasonable distance they're not visible, but I'm not still not sure I consider this acceptable considering the price I paid for this thing.

Also, blue bleeds as t.glinos mentioned, and the panel alignment is nothing to write home about.

I'm pretty upset about the purchase at this point.

Also, bundling a dvi to vga adapter cable instead of a dvi cable is bad karma. I might be slow witted, but I can't imagine a case where anyone would ever want to use that.

The leap that 1080 p units with almost twice the pixel count will have even more screen door, or at the very least, the same, is rather ridiculous.


I have not seen a 1080p DLP unit in person either however my comment was based on posts here from folks who did see them at the trade shows and even though the pixels are indeed smaller, comments were made that the SDE was just as noticeable as in the 720p units.

Mr Jazzz - I do find your comment "cheery" about the SDE not being noticeable at 1.5x units back. If I stand 2x to 5x back I can't see the SDE of my commercial Sony LCD unit either. The point that you are flat out missing, and you can attribute this to my LCOS bias if it makes you feel good, is that the SDE regardless of how far back you have to sit to make it "invisible" does have an impact on the appearance of the image compared to that of an LCOS projector's image. SDE even if the pixel lines cannot be seen at 1.5 has the impact of putting a slightly grey "filter" over the image. It has a dulling effect that is especially noticeable on shiny items such as gold or silver objects. LCOS lifts this "net" from the image. The silvers and golds shimmer and the entire image is less "dirty" looking. It is somewhat like cleaning the lens with the SDE giving the dirty lens picture. Thus you are lost in looking at the trees and not seeing the forrest. You might not see the SDE at 1.5x back but your image whether it is from a 1xDLP, 3xDLP or LCD has a grey "net" over the forrest that you have become used to seeing. Take home a LCOS unit one day and then you will know what I am talking about otherwise you keep contributing my posts to my bias if it make you feel safe and snug in your own mind. Don't be open minded. Don't be objective. Stay right where you are and be happy and "cheery."

Icon Master

Anyone else have a problem with little green specs?

I've had my sx60 for under a week and it's got at least 6 green specs scattered through the image.


This does sound like you have a defective unit. The SX50 had a dust blob issue with early units but those were usually over a pixel in size and they generally became more plentiful the longer you ran the unit.

Just for kicks, check your filter to see if it is correctly positioned in the lid with no open edges where dust can get past it. Also be sure the filter is intact, clean and the door holding it is firmly seated.

Regardless of the cause, dust particles or bad LCOS assembly, the unit should be replaced or repaired. I'd go for the replacement if possible since you have barely had it out of the box.

Icon Master

I've seen LCoS and DLP in the same light controlled room during a multi pj demo (each was covered so as to not effect the performance of the pj being viewed), and the idea that screendoor cuases this 'grey net' is BS. In fact LCoS looked greyer due to its less on/of and ANSI contrast capabilities and that's both measurable and visible at the same time.

Nice try though.

Gary

I've seen LCoS and DLP in the same light controlled room during a multi pj demo (each was covered so as to not effect the performance of the pj being viewed), and the idea that screendoor cuases this 'grey net' is BS. In fact LCoS looked greyer due to its less on/of and ANSI contrast capabilities and that's both measurable and visible at the same time.
Gary

Well Gary - you saw it in a room at a shoot out and I see it every day in my light controlled Home theater which has a Canon LCOS and a Mitsubishi DLP projector and the DLP's SDE does impact the image and have a "greying" or dulling effect compared to LCOS - PERIOD! Sure the DLP has slightly blacker blacks but the LCOS outshines the DLP. Since both my units have the same lumen rating, I should also add that the LCOS appears to have a brighter image too. Guess it is the fact that the LCOS unit has no appreciable filter/SDE over the image. The whites are whiter, the silver more silvery, and man are the golds gold and sparkly. (Sounds like a soap commercial). At times I have to sit further back even with the lamp in econo mode because the shiny stuff hurts my eyes. :)

Nice try though.

Icon Master

Well I've not seen it (has anyone other than you?), and it sounds more like a color saturation issue if it isn't a lumen advantage (LCD and LCoS can have over saturated colors compared to DLPs as the gamut exceeds the standard) - have you measured and compared the lumen output from both machines? Making the gamut match the NTSC target values and equalising the lumens on both machines will give a better idea of performance.

The LCoS I've seen certainly look greyer than any DLP and you've just admitted the DLP blacks are better than the Canons so that confirms that the greyness of LCoS is still an issue. Thanks.

Gary

Thanks Gary, I'll talk to the guys I bought it from today. A closer inspection reveals a dead green element as well.

Wrt black levels, the canon's nothing special. There's a tiny bit of blue to it, too. Better than my friend's RPTV, but blacks aren't black - not even close, even in the lumen destroying theater mode.

"No screen door" is a bit of an exaggeration too, I've seen pics posted that make it look like there really is no screen door, but if you stand around .8 screens away and your eyes work, you'll see it. There's also a tiny grey blur in the middle of every pixel if you display an all white screen.

Also, the "quiet"/econo mode makes an almost imperceptible difference in brightness. If the shiny stuff is too bright in normal mode, it's probably awfully close to the same in quiet mode.

How tight alignment is to be expected from a projector in this price range? There's about 1.5 pixels of vertical misalignment between red and green on my projector, with blue in the middle. If that's within tolerance, maybe I should be thinking about exchanging for something other than an sx60.

Hi Man,

I was responding to Icon, not yourself, so sorry for any confusion.

It does sound like you have a duff unit, and I think most other manufacturers try to keep the panel alignment withing half a pixel, though I believe some may say 1 pixel is OK for one color (blue?) but less for the other two. I would think that you should get an exchange unit quite readily with the problems you've got with the one you have.

Gary

[QUOTE=t.glinos]I find the coma at the edge of the field more objectionable but, that
can only be repaired with a higher quality lens. These defects are NOT
detectable. My G20 had pixel offset problems due to it's analog inputs
that were much worse.

I'll try to take a few images to show the coma and focus issues.
/QUOTE]

I took some images this morning. NOTE: NONE of these defects are detectable
at normal viewing distances, with perhaps, the RED shift. And I've got 20/10 vision.

(1) vbars shows the "glow" from single pixel lines. Red & Green spill over to the
next pixel. Blue spills over two pixels.

(2) bspot show on axis whit spot on black background.

(3) bcorner is in the upper left corner of my screen. It doesn't any worse.

(4) wspot is on axis, black spot on white background. More typical of normal
images. It's not too bad

/QUOTE]


(1) vbars shows the "glow" from single pixel lines. Red & Green spill over to the
next pixel. Blue spills over two pixels.

[/QUOTE]

vbars didn't make the first time around...attachment limit

I am looking for a projector for my sports bar that can project an 8 or 10 foot wide picture with a good deal of ambient light within the bar. How do you think the SX60 would work for standard and HDTV broadcasts of sporting events?

I like the advantages of the LCOS techology's superior pixel structure!

I am looking for a projector for my sports bar that can project an 8 or 10 foot wide picture with a good deal of ambient light within the bar. How do you think the SX60 would work for standard and HDTV broadcasts of sporting events?

I like the advantages of the LCOS techology's superior pixel structure!

The problem with sports bars is smoke(?) and other airborne contaminants. A number of the DLP based Mitsubishi projectors have sealed optical units. This means you won't have to be up on a ladder every few days or weeks having to remove the foam filter and cleaning it. If that is not done with units having filters the internal temperature will rise as the filter clogs and over time the heat buildup will damage the unit. If you don't mind cleaning filters the SX60 is fine and the pixel structure is near invisible except for folks with 20:10 vision who can count the feet on flies at thirty paces.

Check out the Mitsubishi XD460 and similar units by the same manufacturer. These are 4:3, 1024x768, 2x, 2600 lumen rated units so the image may present rainbows to some. The resolution won't be as high and the pixel structure will be visible but with its 5000 hour rated bulb life in lamp econo mode and sealed, filter free design it might be more practical for a bar based installation. There may be other manufacturers with sealed optical paths worth evaluating. I leave it for others here to come forth with their own favorites.

Icon Master

... have you measured and compared the lumen output from both machines? Making the gamut match the NTSC target values and equalising the lumens on both machines will give a better idea of performance.

The LCoS I've seen certainly look greyer than any DLP and you've just admitted the DLP blacks are better than the Canons so that confirms that the greyness of LCoS is still an issue. Thanks.
Gary

I have seen several trade journal test reports on the Canon SX50 and the Mitsubishi projector I have and they are nearly identical in lumen output in standard and econo modes yet the screen door of the DLP does make the image seem duller and less bright at like lamp setting levels. (Yes - I have tweaked the color intensity controls up and down trying to get them to match). If I only watch the DLP unit and not the LCOS unit for a few days I find that I adjust to the shortcomings of DLP but then when I switch on the LCOS the DLP is blown away regardless of its slightly darker blacks. There is no grey issue as you smugly try to categorize onto the LCOS units. The SX60 does have is blacker 1500:1 or 2000:1 blacks in Cinema mode but then the lumens fall off to Ruby levels and most SX50 and SX60 users rather their rich, bright, bigger projected images to those produced by the dimmer, lower lumen "real" 16:9 HT projectors.

I have done some interesting "blind" comparisons with buddies and clients where I have taken the same image and projected it in sRGB mode (econo) at ten feet diagonal and then reduced the image to six feet in the SX60's Cinema mode with the blacker blacks and not a single person I have shown this comparison to preferred the smaller, dimmer, blacker black image.

So Gary, you keep trying to put down LCOS but again you haven't had one of these Canon units in your HT. Perhaps if you try it, you'll like it unless you have Superman vision and can't live with a pixel structure that most folks can't discern beyond a foot or so. If blacker blacks are your thing then you can still get an SX60 and run it in Cinema mode with a highly reflective screen or keep the image smaller like most folks do with their Ruby's or low lumen DLP based HT projectors - the later still having its noticeable SDE.

Icon Master

P.S. If someone with 20:10 vision can still see the SDE of the SX60 at .8 screen distance, he must be able to see the SDE of DLP's across town. Having vision that acute is more a curse than blessing - at least when trying to enjoy any digital based HT projector. My condolences to you... Perhaps as you get older the "curse" will leave you. It did me now that iI am old and stuck with 20:25 vison - thank goodness!

You're the one that is putting down other technologies Icon - just look at the comments you make about the Ruby (including the owners) and DLP for example. I'm not putting LCoS down at all, just correcting some of the daft claims you have about other technologies and mentioning the cons of LCoS at the same time, nothing I have said is untrue. I try to stick to facts and not invent reasons to 'put down' other technologies as you put it. You yourself said that DLP has superior blacks so I'm only repeating what you said and didn't make it up. Don't have a go at me for your own comments.

I like LCoS a lot but not the greyness most of them have (including the Qualia which is its only real 'failing' IMHO), and I can say the same about most LCDs too (except the Sony HS60 which has very good black levels). I've not seen the Ruby to comment on but that doesn't appear to suffer from the greyness other LCoS pjs do. DLP has it's own issues of course, but a screen-door reducing brightness is not one of them. Advertised lumen numbers can be taken with a pinch of salt, and two identically rated pjs may have vastly different lumen outputs in reality. I've measured some pjs myself and found them to be as much as 40% less than advertised, whereas some only 25% less. You may be comparing two similarly rated pjs with different true output values, and the one with the most hours on the lamp will also have fewer lumens than when new. Instead of making conjecture a s ameans to put down other technologies, try using some genuine facts instead.

You keep on about pixel structure like that is the be all and end all of image reproduction (and LCoS has it too, but to a lesser degree), yet most people here don't see it on their (DLP) set-ups because of their seating distance (1.54 in my case with 1280 x 720), so I don't see why it is such a big issue for you (DLP has approx 88% fill factor, and LCoS 93%, so the 5% is hardly going to make a big difference - provided you are comparing the same resolution and not different ones which is what you are normally doing). If you want to sit close enough so that screendoor is an issue with DLP or LCD, then a higher res pj or one with a better fill factor like LCoS or CRT are the best choices. You also talk about brightness, and that is fine if you want a large screen or a very bright image, but too much brightness can be a bad thing as it can highlight image artefacts and raise black levels even further, so to aim for under 12ft lamberts gives a more cinematic look (to me) and far less image noise. Too bright tends to look less filmlike and can hurt the eyes in bright scenes (as some have testified here regarding the Canons). The eye tends to prefer bright images but with home theater that is not always condusive to a good image. It can also be a personal preference of course.

Gary

Mr. Lightfoot: I believe you under appreciate the superiority of this product to the competing technologies. You almost have to place yourself on top of the screen to see any S.D.E. and the flaws in the picture quality I believe are sourse related. The black levels are fine and the colours are breathtaking - much better than any other technology. I am not a fan of Sony's Lcos version. I prefer the JVC product line and the less expensive Canon which uses much of JVC well designed chips and panels. To me, unless it's a financial issue, I would never buy a DLP. I would purchase a LCD first. I think that dynamic irises and spinning colour wheels to solve inherent techological shortcomings increase the chance of product failure and short usage life I prefer the simpler methods employed by JVC and Canon in their projectors. After all, how bad can this technology be, is if all you can complain about is black level? I would prefer this than to the inaccuarate colours, headaches, and very noticable S.D.E. of the competing technologies. Deep down you know that Icon is right

Deep down you know that Icon is right

Well, since I have seen all four of their pjs I think I can comment. They are nice, but are they that much better than the competition. The pjs are bright and if that is what you like then buy the SX6 instead of the SX60. The on/off contrast isn't great and I don't believe that filter is doing anything. It may help, but no review yet has measured the contrast of the pjs in both modes. I told Darin that matching it with a DVDO VP30 might enhance the pic, but then he replied you are getting close to a Ruby price. When the new Panny 1080p comes out, it may be better in every way except light output for a cheaper price. That is why I say wait. On your other issues beginning with inaccurate colors, that is dependent on hitting the correct SMPTE colors. A number of pjs can do this after calibration. Your second issue regarding headaches (referring to DLP) is a problem for a small portion of the population and is decreasing with the faster wheels. Cineramax said he is susceptable, but didn't have a problem with the TI demo at Infocomm. On SDE, I could still see the screen door on the Canons. Was it good? Yes, but what is the MTF? I am thinking the MTF is lower which bleeds the pixels together on this LCOS. It may be smoother, but it won't be sharp. You could probably achieve the same thing with a slight defocus of a DLP.

In the end, the Canon is a nice pj for what it is which is a bright, high res pj. If you want to put this to bed, then write Canon and ask them why they haven't sent a pj for Darin to review. He could look it over and take some measurements. This would give us better clarity than the lacking pj reviews or Icon's posts.

Ericglo

P.S. If someone with 20:10 vision can still see the SDE of the SX60 at .8 screen distance, he must be able to see the SDE of DLP's across town. Having vision that acute is more a curse than blessing - at least when trying to enjoy any digital based HT projector. My condolences to you... Perhaps as you get older the "curse" will leave you. It did me now that iI am old and stuck with 20:25 vison - thank goodness!

It's not a curse. It's FUN. An acquaintance of mine is a professor of opthamology
at a nearby university. He tested my vision years ago when I complained that
my vision was starting to get blurry. He had a lot of fun finding the limits to my vision.
And YES, age is starting to have it's inevitable effects. I've started to wear reading
glasses. And no, I can't see the pixel structure past 3 feet.

Can we move on to something more relevant to the SX60?

I'm a bit disappointed with the ATSC/NTSC colour decoder on my unit.
In point, the decoding of Red. Has anyone noticed this?

Hi raneil,

I wasn't sure if you were serious with your comments but due to a lack of smilie I assume you are. I certainly don't underappreaciate the technology by any means, but I do know what I want from a display and certain attributes such as grey blacks, less than 2000:1 on/off CR (genuine at D65), 4:3 light spill when displaying 16:9 and colour uniformity issues are not some of them.

Ericglo has said much of what I would have said, so I won't repeat him or myself from earlier posts. As for DLP issues I have never suffered from rainbows and I calibrate my pjs to D65 so they have flat greyscale tracking. With colour uniformity problems this will mean that only a small part of the image is colour accurate. I find DLP to have excellent greyscale tracking and colour uniformity and most can match the colour gamuts quite well so no colour problems there. Oversaturated colours may look nice but are not accurate.

I've seen LCoS in both DILA and Qualia form so I know how minimal the pixel structure is. I also know that I as much as I liked the images they produce (and I do, very much), I found the grey levels distracting (even on the Qualia), but this can be classed as a personal prefefrence. The new SX60 may be an improvement in that with the internal lens filter but I've yet to see one. I also know that they can suffer from colour uniformity issues (as can LCDs). I would hardly call that a superior feature but it can be remedied with William Phelps' shading tool. .

Why would you buy an LCD over a DLP other than RBE? The only LCD I've seen that competes with DLP is the Sony HS60, but it still had some colour uniformity problems. A very impressive machine for the money IMHO, and a measured 6500:1 when part way calibrated to D65. You could occasionally see the auto iris work but it has enough native CR to maintain good blacks and shadow detail at all times which is important if you want to see all the image detail and not lose it in grey haze. Regarding your comments re dynamic irises and spinning wheels, you will find mostly LCDs with auto iris so you are now placing them in the group you would not buy as well. Organic panels are not condusive to long life either

Image noise from the source is the main reason I prefer an image with cinema levels of brightness rather than tv/plasma levels. Too high and they will be highlighted and become distracting. Again, that is a personal preference though and can easily be remedied with a lens filter.

No technology is perfect, each with it's own pros and cons, you just have top pick your poison. As for Icon being right, I have to strongly dissagree. In order to promote the Canons he has to invent issues with other technologies and has even resorted to riduculing Ruby owners. If you think that kind of behaviour is right, then again I would have to dissagree.

Gary

Actually, smoke isn't the issue since there is no smoking in the restaurant or bar-- we politely ask all smokers to keep their butts outside!

However, I will definitely check into the process required to maintain the filter for the SX60. If it is a simple procedure, that would not be a problem; however, if it would require disconnecting the unit from the ceiling, that is another thing.

My prime concern is losing too much floor space if you have to sit 15 or even 12 feet from the screen.


Does anyone think the 4:3 format causes any issues with HDTV broadcasts?

My prime concern is losing too much floor space if you have to sit 15 or even 12 feet from the screen.



How big is your screen?

This might be helpful to you:

http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html

Gary

Not at all.

Sports are going to be in 720P mostly so the SX60's 1400x1050 pixels can display the 1280x720 pixels with zero scaling. (or you can have it scaled to 1400x788 - easy menu choice)

It also handles 1080i very well too.

The World Series was fabulous on my SX50.

Ken

Hi raneil,

I As for DLP issues I have never suffered from rainbows and I calibrate my pjs to D65 so they have flat greyscale tracking.

Gary

What do you use for your calibrations.
I'm shopping around.

My SX60 has no shading problems to speak of.

Hi T,

I use Colorfacts with the TR-1 sensor, but other options are AccuCal with the Gretag McBeth Eye One Pro spectroradiometer (this sensor can be used with CF as well, and is the better sensor for accuracy, tho more expensive), or a much cheaper kind of DIY version using the colorimiter from the SpyderTV package (do a forum search for more info) and an Excell spreadsheet (either Raders free one or Bear5Ks semi automated spreadsheet).

CF starts at around $2000, Accucal is $500 plus the cost of the GMB i1 ($800+?) and the SpyderTV package is under $200 now, so you have a good price range, with the cheaper version needing more elbow work, but all of them can get you to D65.

HTH

Gary.

I have Colorfacts and its ok, but I highly recommend Accucal. CF will work with the Gretag Macbech EyeOne Spectroradiometer, but Accucal's control software is much more accurate. (especially at lower light levels)

You want to spend your money where it counts - on the measuring instrument.

Check out the info at http://www.accucal.org. They have some accuracy comparisons between the EyeOne and the more popular filter pods.

Ken

The only LCD I've seen that competes with DLP is the Sony HS60, but it still had some colour uniformity problems. A very impressive machine for the money IMHO, and a measured 6500:1 when part way calibrated to D65.

No technology is perfect, each with it's own pros and cons, you just have top pick your poison. As for Icon being right, I have to strongly dissagree. In order to promote the Canons he has to invent issues with other technologies and has even resorted to riduculing Ruby owners. If you think that kind of behaviour is right, then again I would have to dissagree.
Gary

Gary -

You must really be blind to SDE and how it affects the image. (See Image Attaceehed below). I have not seen the HS60 but unless there was a major change by Sony, their LCD panels have HUGE screen doors. I have a Sony CX75 commercial unit that I just used last night at a Mac user group meeting and its SDE is noticeable at 50 feet even with a six foot image. The HS51 also has a SDE much like my CX75.

As to defocusing DLP to make its SDE less noticeable - it doesn't work. I tried it with my Mitsubishi. You can defocus LCD units to soften the SD but for whatever reason, that trick doesn't work well with DLP. The image gets blurry before the SD is softened.

As to attacking folks, it was Darin who had trouble with my depreciation math based on nominal (not precise) market value estimates. He then attacked me for using estimates instead of precise numbers which of course is impossible since I was dealing with subjective values based on depreciation percentages extracted from my experience with computer depreciation values. Darin went as far as saying he hates salesman that exploit numbers for their own gain but he failed to point out that I am not on this web site to garner business. I only sell Macs and video products to my clients in my own market area.

Since Darin has a huge following here it was I who became the "goat" in that argument in the eyes of Darin's troopers - many of whom own Ruby's. The correctness of my depreciation math will be borne out shortly with the advent of "cheap" 1080p projectors that will make the Ruby a huge, heavy, overpriced ceiling anchor worth less than 50% of its purchase price. Darin might be great at promoting projectors he believes in but he didn't want to hear how much it cost to own more expensive esoteric technology - be it projectors or computers.

Gary - As to Canon sending out units for testing to Darin - why would they? His bias is so strong for his Ruby and dimmer based projectors (pretty much like yourself by your own admission regarding image noise), then why bother sending a unit to someone bound to give it a thumbs down review? Instead go look at the SX60's Projector Central review. He dubbed it the best HT projector for $5K or less.

I agree that there is no perfect projector technology so we each have to pick what is important to us. I do think LCOS in general produces the most film like imago and many here agree. This has to include even the Ruby & JVC gang since these are LCOS based. What I find almost mindless here is the over emphasis on CR. Yes, I would love to have a 10000:1 CR in my SX60 but then if the source material (film) is only capable of 2000:1(?) why do we need absolute blacks? I can live with big, bright with a tad of grey in my black. 1000:1 is just fine with a bright SDE "free" image that looks like film. The 10000:1 to 6500:1 CR goes out the window if even a candle is placed in the HT viewing area. I think few of us have absolute black "cave" viewing conditions 100% of the time we are using our projectors although few here will admit to this - except us Canon fans who have the lumens to spare.

Choose your projectors based on what is important to you but unless you have money to burn don't go overboard on high end units that will be obsolete and overpriced the day after you purchase them. The (nominally) $7K and up units will fall in value fast and hard and most are low in lumens.

THE EYE OPENER!!!!!!!

Gary since you have problems seeing SD I have attached (below) a portion of a page from Canon's SX60 brochure showing preciely what I see when I compare the same image on my Canon LCOS to one on my Mitsubishi DLP. Notice the overall darkness to the non-LCOS image cause by the more pronounced "gray SDE net" hanging over the image. My lousy 20:25 eyes see this "net" with DLP and LCD units and not with LCOS. You might be bugged with image noise so you prefer dim but that SDE will be there for even the 1080p and even three DLP units too.

...e SX60's Projector Central review. He dubbed it the best HT projector for $5K or less. ...

Correction, he dubbed it the best 4:3 HT projector for $5K or less. And I have emailed with Evan a few times. He likes watching 4:3 material very large; much like you. Evan clearly has preferences like everyone else, but don't take his word as truth. As for me, I own a 4:3 projector myself, and wanting more contrast ratio is not a mindless blind following. It gives the picture more depth, especially in dark scenes. BTW, if you like light cannons, there is a new 16:9 dlp model out there getting rave reviews. Why don't you have a look? betcha it will have more light output in 16:9 mode than your canon (even at high brightness mode for SX-60).

CBTW, if you like light cannons, there is a new 16:9 dlp model out there getting rave reviews. Why don't you have a look? betcha it will have more light output in 16:9 mode than your canon (even at high brightness mode for SX-60).

Don't keep us in suspense, please. Are you talking about the Mits WU2000? Thanks.

Don't keep us in suspense, please. Are you talking about the Mits WU2000? Thanks.

Don't want to change the direction of this thread... We are discussing the +/- of the SX-60. It's capability vs comparable dlp units is being called into question, so I was just trying to offer an alternative...

Personally, I love the look of JVC D-ILA sets for their rich color. One of the strengths of LCOS and LCD. But I wish there was just more snap to it by upping the contrast.

Since Darin has a huge following here it was I who became the "goat" in that argument in the eyes of Darin's troopers - many of whom own Ruby's. The correctness of my depreciation math will be borne out shortly with the advent of "cheap" 1080p projectors that will make the Ruby a huge, heavy, overpriced ceiling anchor worth less than 50% of its purchase price. Darin might be great at promoting projectors he believes in but he didn't want to hear how much it cost to own more expensive esoteric technology - be it projectors or computers.

Gary - As to Canon sending out units for testing to Darin - why would they? His bias is so strong for his Ruby and dimmer based projectors (pretty much like yourself by your own admission regarding image noise), then why bother sending a unit to someone bound to give it a thumbs down review? Instead go look at the SX60's Projector Central review. He dubbed it the best HT projector for $5K or less.


You became the goat because Darin is known for being objective with his measurements and observations, while you are known for being a Canon dealer and shill. Who posts fake Photoshopped screenshots from a product brochure as "proof" of their theories? Honestly?

If Darin were to calibrate and review an SX60, I have no doubt we'd get a 100% accurate and honest review of its capabilities. He'd probably even offer Canon suggestions on how to improve the product based on his technical experience. He was able to get an H79 from a native contrast of ~3000:1 to 9000:1 through his own custom modifications.

Icon,

You accuse me of being blind yet you've confused my comments with those of Ericglo and attributed them to me (defocussing and Darin reviewing the Canon). Seems you're the one with bad eyes.

Again you're confused about the different types of contrast, and there is a difference between absolute black level and black levels in mixed scenes. That's where you can have some very grey looking blacks that can look unatural (IMHO) with some technologies. I've never been one for the deepest blacks otherwise I'd have a CRT (or a Ruby), but I don't enjoy seeing grey looking scenes. That's not to say that better absolute blacks aren't good to have, they're just not high on my list of priorities right now.

I was seriously interested in the SX50 at one time which is why I was reading the thread, but the dust problem, tearing and limited calibration, added to the LCoS greyness put me off unfortunatley (plus the fact it's 4:3 and would need the halo to be masked as I'd only use it as 16:9). I was surprised at how zealously you promoted it over all others (including the Ruby) yet you dumped it like a hot potato as soon as the SX60 came out. If the 50 was that good it makes me wonder why you sold it on so quickly (before you even had the 60). Perhaps it just wasn't as good as you said it was, and being a discontinued model you wanted to promote the newer model you could sell from your dealership. It seems that some people may have bought the 50 on your sales pitch and have been left wishing they'd waited for the SX60 instead. You don't seem to be entirely honest in your comments regarding such things as screendoor either which most don't see at normal seating distances yet suddenly it's a terrible thing that degrades the image in such a way that makes LCoS so much better and the only technology to buy. It would seem you are seeing something that the vast majority of people are not.

Like I say. you're the one attacking others, not the other way round, and you even admit it (from the SX50 thread):

I cannot deny it. This is a bit of a "swipe" at our fellow LCOS fans, the Ruby folks, with their expensive, fast fading "bulbs."

Gary

You became the goat because Darin is known for being objective with his measurements and observations, while you are known for being a Canon dealer and shill.His post was another attempt by him to deceive people. Fortunately, the history is there for people to look at themselves or he would have more chance of getting away with rewriting it.

I'm sure we all know people in real life who, no matter how red handed they get caught, will continue to claim that they did nothing wrong and will change the story of what happened in hopes that with time they will be able to get people to believe it. Icon Master has never taken any responsibility for using MSRP for the projector he wanted to make look bad and street for the projector he wanted to make look good. In fact, despite being a dealer for the SX50 and so obviously somebody who would know the difference between MSRP and street for it, he claimed that the reason he used MSRP for the Ruby in his numbers was that we aren't supposed to use street prices here. A rather worthless excuse considering that it was obvious to pretty much everybody that it didn't keep him from using street for the SX50.
As to attacking folks, it was Darin who had trouble with my depreciation math based on nominal (not precise) market value estimates. He then attacked me for using estimates instead of precise numbers which of course is impossible since I was dealing with subjective values based on depreciation percentages extracted from my experience with computer depreciation values. You are just proving that you can't be trusted to give an honest account of what happened.

As people can see here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7141993&&#post7141993
Ruby - [($10K-$2K) - $2K]/365= $6K/365 or $16.43 more per movie than I
"Q" - [($30K-10K) - $2K]/365= $18K/365 or $49.31 more per movie than I

FORMULA: [(SXRD New value-sold value)- loss of value selling sx50]/365Icon Master not only used MSRP for the Ruby while using street for the SX50, he used an assumption of 80% loss between those numbers for the Ruby and 50% loss for the SX50. That is, he assumed that both would be worth $2k after a year. When confronted, how did he respond? He claimed (here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7149057&&#post7149057)):
I actually quoted the higher conservative number values on the worth of the SXRD "used" units in my calculations. They will probably be worth less.That's right. He claimed $2k for the value of the Ruby after a year and that he had used the higher conservative number and that it will likely be worth less. So, now what does he try to pull close to 5 months later right here?
The correctness of my depreciation math will be borne out shortly with the advent of "cheap" 1080p projectors that will make the Ruby a huge, heavy, overpriced ceiling anchor worth less than 50% of its purchase price.As people can see, his original numbers were 20% value after a year which became close to 25% after using street and now he claims that he will be proven right by the Ruby being "worth less than 50% of its purchase price." Are people catching on to the kinds of tricks he pulls? Anybody think that his numbers will be proven right just by year old Rubies being worth less than 50% of their purchase prices? Anybody think that year old SX50s and year old Rubies are likely to have the same $2k value that he used in his original numbers, while trying to make people believe here that the issue I had was that he didn't use precise numbers?

The main thing I think people should keep in mind is that it is very unlikely that this is the last time that Icon Master will try to deceive people about what happened or what his claims were. He probably figures that eventually he'll get away with it.

I would have likely stayed out of this, but once again Icon Master decides to bring me into it again and try to deceive people.

--Darin

Hmmm, I wrote:
On SDE, I could still see the screen door on the Canons. Was it good? Yes, but what is the MTF? I am thinking the MTF is lower which bleeds the pixels together on this LCOS. It may be smoother, but it won't be sharp. You could probably achieve the same thing with a slight defocus of a DLP.

In the end, the Canon is a nice pj for what it is which is a bright, high res pj. If you want to put this to bed, then write Canon and ask them why they haven't sent a pj for Darin to review. He could look it over and take some measurements. This would give us better clarity than the lacking pj reviews or Icon's posts.

Ericglo

Icon wrote:
Gary -


As to defocusing DLP to make its SDE less noticeable - it doesn't work. I tried it with my Mitsubishi. You can defocus LCD units to soften the SD but for whatever reason, that trick doesn't work well with DLP. The image gets blurry before the SD is softened.


Gary - As to Canon sending out units for testing to Darin - why would they? His bias is so strong for his Ruby and dimmer based projectors (pretty much like yourself by your own admission regarding image noise), then why bother sending a unit to someone bound to give it a thumbs down review? Instead go look at the SX60's Projector Central review. He dubbed it the best HT projector for $5K or less.


Gary wrote:
Icon,

You accuse me of being blind yet you've confused my comments with those of Ericglo and attributed them to me (defocussing and Darin reviewing the Canon). Seems you're the one with bad eyes.

Gary

I wonder who is correct.:)

Icon,
You may be correct on the defocusing of DLP, as I haven't tried it. That still doesn't take into account the MTF. If, as I believe, the MTF of LCOS is similar to CRT, then it could explain why people like the smooth look of these technologies. A low MTF presents other issues though which is why a higher figure is desired. I know VDC would love to get their hands on some high bandwidth chips to increase the resolution and MTF of their CRTs.

On Darin reviewing the Canon, I hope I didn't let the cat out of the bag. Darin has done a review over at Secrets for the Samsung and he was supposed to get a SX60 from Canon to review for the same website. Darin and I both spoke with the Canon people at Infocomm. The head of the division was very interested to get the pj in Darin's hands to get his impressions of it. As I think I have stated before, we both thought the Canon reps were nice, humble and down to earth. They realize that they have just started in this industry and have much to learn. I won't speak for Darin, but I am hoping they are successful. Icon, have you met or spoke with the people at Canon? I told Darin after we left their booth that we should have mentioned AVS to them, as they could have received some constructive criticism that could help them in the future. Of course, the thought occurred to me that they might be somewhat emabarresed by some of your posts.

On the ProjectorCentral review, I thought it was next to worthless. I have a deep disdain for their reviews, because it is all based on their subjective opinion. In this case, he loves bright 4:3 images. Great, there are a lot of people who love HD 16:9 or scope movies. He is biased against those pjs in favor of something he prefers. Go read Darin's review on Secrets. It is balanced and gives measurements, so one can make an informed decision. You are right that not everyone lives in a dark cave, but I can turn off the lights and get excellent on/off with my CRT. Darin's review would put a number on that on/off, so I and everyone else could decide if it is satisfactory for their use or not based on their viewing history and preferences.

Ericglo

The Ruby has been shipping for about 8 months now correct? Anyone know what they go for used so far?

The Ruby has been shipping for about 8 months now correct? Anyone know what they go for used so far?

I saw one go on ebay for around $5500, but that was unique. I think most go for over $6k. I have seen two SX50s go for around $2k recently.

Ericglo

Of course, the thought occurred to me that they might be somewhat embarrassed by some of your posts.You think? :)

I agree about the Canon guys. Class acts.

--Darin

You became the goat because Darin is known for being objective with his measurements and observations, while you are known for being a Canon dealer and shill. Who posts fake Photoshopped screenshots from a product brochure as "proof" of their theories? Honestly?
.

I love being the "goat" when it exposes narrowminded or misdirected thinking. Darin is a perfect example of being too scientific to a fault. He is well intentioned but cannot take criticism and goes off if someone dares challenge him which few here have ever done.


You keep on about pixel structure like that is the be all and end all of image reproduction (and LCOS has it too, but to a lesser degree), yet most people here don't see it on their (DLP) set-ups because of their seating distance (1.54 in my case with 1280 x 720), so I don't see why it is such a big issue for you (DLP has approx 88% fill factor, and LCoS 93%, so the 5% is hardly going to make a big difference - provided you are comparing the same resolution and not different ones which is what you are normally doing).
Gary

You guys are utterly amazing. I love it. Thank you for proving to me how totally biased you are in supporting your own points of view that you cannot see the forrest through the trees. You guys keep forgetting - when you look at a whole image you should be seeing the forrest and not each tree - or in your case each pixel. So you sit far enough back that you claim that you cannot see the effects of SDE on the "forrest" because you no longer see the SD. That is really good stuff. Then you say that in shootouts you saw no difference in the image of a DLP versus a LCOS in terms of the SDE effect at a distance. Then you take the example provided in the Canon brochure and call it a PhotoShop makeover yet not a one of you has a DLP and LCOS unit in their HT like I do.

I flat out am saying that the SDE of a DLP unit or LCD has a significant overall effect on the appearance of the image even when you sit far enough back to not see the pixel lines. And like business math handicapped Darin, you keep giving me the numbers to prove my point. (No - not the fact that Rubys are going for about 50% of their new value on e-Bay at eight months. We need to wait a bit more for when the "cheap" 1080p DLPs ship. Then my numbers will start validating themselves regardless of Darins attempts to discredit them and his fast falling Ruby).

No - the numbers I am referring to is in regards to SDE as quoted above. Gary - thanks for the research! I knew I had seen it here and I can count on you guys for giving me the numbers I needed.

Lets see - If you have perfect image projected from a perfect media that has no pixel structure, no film grain etc, then that is the ultimate goal. But to get an image on a screen in our HT it has to be broken down into bits of data by some device, stored and forwarded and then displayed. For this discussion we will focus on the HT side and not the encoding (camera), storing and forwarding methods. Thus we are now trying to get this perfect image on our screens. Since we are dealing with Digital projectors that have pixel structures then we have to be aware of how that pixel structure effects the whole image on the wall as it is displayed. Thus we come to the SDE.

Years ago I tested what was possibly the first all in one digital HT projector in the Sharp Model One (or something like that). Its pixels were huge. It was hard to see the image at any distance since the pixel lines were probably as thick as the data portion of the pixel. But whatever - it was the first effort to get an image on the wall in a HT digitally from a one piece box. Now we have units that are closing in on near invisible pixel structures and if we sit far enough back we don't even see the pixel lines but what most here seem unwilling to accept is that those lines do still affect the overall appearance of the image. Gary wants to believe that the 88% fill rate of the DLP and its 5% difference from LCOS does not make a noticeable difference on the overall image and Thirdkind wants to hide his head in the sand too by calling the Canon example posted as a "PhotoShop doctor job."

Well if we start with that 100% "perfect image" and DLP has a 88% fill rate - what does that mean "kids?" It means that 12% of the picture is unchanging BLACK pixel border structure all the time.

And to say that a mere 5% difference between 88% fill and 93% fill is insignificant is a real laugher too. Go to your Home Depot paint sets and take a can of perfect white paint and then add in 12% black paint and what do you get? You get gray not white. Do the same with any color paint and add in 12% black and you get a darker, blacker version of the original color. Now back up to the original white or original color and add in 7% black paint. And there you have it. With DLP you are adding in 12% BLACK on every image on every frame all the time!!! With LCOS you are adding in 7% BLACK and actually the pixel structure on my Canons are a faint gray so it impacts the image at a lesser degree than the black pixel structure of DLP and LCD. Regardless, this 12% BLACK ALL THE TIME darkens the image and makes it duller just like the Canon example shows. If you have no side-by-side capability then your mind does adjust to making SDE invisible to you but 12% says it is always lurking there

And don't tell yourself that SDE is not something you do not see because you sit far enough back that it is "invisible." It is there and will be there till they get down to 100% transmissive chips and I don't even see how that will ever happen under any current scheme except laser direct to screen maybe? But for now our forrests - our whole images - will always have a black net over them and how thick this net is determines how it impacts the overall look of the image regardless of how far back from the screen you sit - nor does darkening the room or buying lower lumen projectors to hide the image noise do anything to get rid of the SDE's effect on the overall look of the"forrest." It is also no wonder that DLP has its blacker blacks than LCOS since 5% more of its image is black all the time. Perhaps that is part of the reason why pure LCOS w/o the iris trick has a bit more gray in its black? We'll save that discussion for another day.

"Have fun playing in the forrest."

Icon Master

My God you're a bore.

I love being the "goat" when it exposes narrowminded or misdirected thinking.

Unfortunately that would be you.


You guys are utterly amazing. I love it. Thank you for proving to me how totally biased you are in supporting your own points of view that you cannot see the forrest through the trees. You guys keep forgetting - when you look at a whole image you should be seeing the forrest and not each tree - or in your case each pixel. So you sit far enough back that you claim that you cannot see the effects of SDE on the "forrest" because you no longer see the SD. That is really good stuff.

I'm not biased, you are: you are stating that DLPs screendoor gives them an inferior image, and I just stated the fact that I sit approx 1.5 x screen width away (as do many others) and see no screen door. That isn't a bias that's a fact. I'm not sure many people sit much closer than that at home even with LCoS. I can't sit much closer due to room restrictions anyway - I've always sat 12ft away from my screen even when I had my 1st projector, and the distance hasn't changed since. What has changed is that I now have a scope screen so I can have an 8ft wide screen instead of a 7ft wide one. In effect I'm now sitting closer, not further away.


Then you say that in shootouts you saw no difference in the image of a DLP versus a LCOS in terms of the SDE effect at a distance.

Where did I say that exactly? Do you have a quote?

Or are you referring to my comments here:


I've seen LCoS and DLP in the same light controlled room during a multi pj demo (each was covered so as to not effect the performance of the pj being viewed), and the idea that screendoor cuases this 'grey net' is BS. In fact LCoS looked greyer due to its less on/of and ANSI contrast capabilities and that's both measurable and visible at the same time.

Nice try though.

Gary

So you're either deliberatly trying to misrepresent me or don't understand what I was saying.



Then you take the example provided in the Canon brochure and call it a PhotoShop makeover yet not a one of you has a DLP and LCOS unit in their HT like I do.

Again you've attributed someone elses comments to me, and again you're wrong.



I flat out am saying that the SDE of a DLP unit or LCD has a significant overall effect on the appearance of the image even when you sit far enough back to not see the pixel lines.

Then I'd say you'be be flat out wrong for most people. If someone had to sit over 2 or 3 x screen width so as to not see SDE, then your suggestion may have some merit, but to be sitting at 1.5 x screen width proves how incorrect you are. I can sit closer but that's not convenient in my situation - even if I had an LCoS pj I would still be at 1.5 x screen widths (except I don't, for the reasons previously stated).


And like business math handicapped Darin, you keep giving me the numbers to prove my point. (No - not the fact that Rubys are going for about 50% of their new value on e-Bay at eight months. We need to wait a bit more for when the "cheap" 1080p DLPs ship. Then my numbers will start validating themselves regardless of Darins attempts to discredit them and his fast falling Ruby).

There's nothing wrong with Darins maths and your maths may become correct one day, provided lots of things happen which haven't so far (such as cheap 1080 DLP). Have you got any links to the ebay prices for the Ruby? I've only seen scams showing the Ruby at anything near those prices.


No - the numbers I am referring to is in regards to SDE as quoted above. Gary - thanks for the research! I knew I had seen it here and I can count on you guys for giving me the numbers I needed.

It wasn't research Icon, it was what I thought was pretty much common knowledge and I think it hardly proves much of anything other than the SDE effect isn't as great as you would like it to be.


Lets see - If you have perfect image projected from a perfect media that has no pixel structure, no film grain etc, then that is the ultimate goal. But to get an image on a screen in our HT it has to be broken down into bits of data by some device, stored and forwarded and then displayed. For this discussion we will focus on the HT side and not the encoding (camera), storing and forwarding methods. Thus we are now trying to get this perfect image on our screens. Since we are dealing with Digital projectors that have pixel structures then we have to be aware of how that pixel structure effects the whole image on the wall as it is displayed. Thus we come to the SDE.

Years ago I tested what was possibly the first all in one digital HT projector in the Sharp Model One (or something like that). Its pixels were huge. It was hard to see the image at any distance since the pixel lines were probably as thick as the data portion of the pixel. But whatever - it was the first effort to get an image on the wall in a HT digitally from a one piece box. Now we have units that are closing in on near invisible pixel structures and if we sit far enough back we don't even see the pixel lines but what most here seem unwilling to accept is that those lines do still affect the overall appearance of the image. Gary wants to believe that the 88% fill rate of the DLP and its 5% difference from LCOS does not make a noticeable difference on the overall image and Thirdkind wants to hide his head in the sand too by calling the Canon example posted as a "PhotoShop doctor job."

You're still attributing others comments to me - you really should pay attention or you'll carry on looking foolish.


Well if we start with that 100% "perfect image" and DLP has a 88% fill rate - what does that mean "kids?" It means that 12% of the picture is unchanging BLACK pixel border structure all the time.

Except it's not black if you look closely.


And to say that a mere 5% difference between 88% fill and 93% fill is insignificant is a real laugher too. Go to your Home Depot paint sets and take a can of perfect white paint and then add in 12% black paint and what do you get? You get gray not white. Do the same with any color paint and add in 12% black and you get a darker, blacker version of the original color. Now back up to the original white or original color and add in 7% black paint. And there you have it. With DLP you are adding in 12% BLACK on every image on every frame all the time!!! With LCOS you are adding in 7% BLACK and actually the pixel structure on my Canons are a faint gray so it impacts the image at a lesser degree than the black pixel structure of DLP and LCD. Regardless, this 12% BLACK ALL THE TIME darkens the image and makes it duller just like the Canon example shows. If you have no side-by-side capability then your mind does adjust to making SDE invisible to you but 12% says it is always lurking there

Nice analogy but utterly wrong. The gaps are not mixed into the pixels like paint so don't have the effect you are saying. Mixing light and mixing paint work in totaly different ways too (we did that at school). If anything, only less light will be reflected due to a smaller reflecting surface area (provided both technologies have the same reflectance). With DLP being mirrors I would think they would have more reflectance than LCoS, but of course the DLP colour wheel will reduce the light output, so assuming the same lamp and lumen output it would be interesting to see what the differences really were.

Perhaps comparing a brighter 3 chip DLP to an LCoS would be a closer match since that would be closer for reflectance purposes


And don't tell yourself that SDE is not something you do not see because you sit far enough back that it is "invisible." It is there and will be there till they get down to 100% transmissive chips and I don't even see how that will ever happen under any current scheme except laser direct to screen maybe? But for now our forrests - our whole images - will always have a black net over them and how thick this net is determines how it impacts the overall look of the image regardless of how far back from the screen you sit - nor does darkening the room or buying lower lumen projectors to hide the image noise do anything to get rid of the SDE's effect on the overall look of the"forrest." It is also no wonder that DLP has its blacker blacks than LCOS since 5% more of its image is black all the time. Perhaps that is part of the reason why pure LCOS w/o the iris trick has a bit more gray in its black? We'll save that discussion for another day.

"Have fun playing in the forrest."

Icon Master

Wow - you're now suggesting that better black level is associated with the larger screen door, yets LCDs have approx 60% fill factor and also have inferior blacks to DLP, so how does that work then?

I would sugest you try to stick to the truth and some facts before makiing comments like that that are really embarrassing.

As for image noise - it's there in the source, and a brighter display will show that, especially in the dark areas (which should be dark). If you can't see it either you're not aware of it for whatever reason (some don't find it a distraction but I do), or the display is masking it. If it is, then what else is it hiding with respect to image detail?

If you want a totaly screendoor free technology, why don't you have a CRT?

Gary.